reinhard_scheuregger

rachel,

depending on your model'S skin i got best results aiming the softbox (huge softbox)

straight at the model. my rule of thumb is: about 6 feet away and about 6 feet high,

angled downwards. so you will be ending up shooting underneath the box.

my experience is, that even the slightest angle of the axis makes wrinkles jump out. i do

that only with models with flawless skin.

another little helper is, place a reflector right underneath the model's chest, it will lighten

up her neck, soften those grooves around the nose plus give a nice glow in her eyes.

reinhard

stefanie, the file is called "RB67_Power_Drive_Film_Mag", i guess you'll find it on the Mamiya

HP. out of legal reasons i can'T attach it here...

reinhard

hi all,

this might sound like a dumb question, but i sort of cannot figure out how to properly get

the correct settings with the bult-in flash active and the camera in either "A" or "S".

my readings - obviously the ambient light reading - do not change once the flash has been

opened. i do get an extra information, though, minus EV values. by changing shutterspeed

and/or aperture i can bring that value up to +/- zero. but, and this puzzles me: which value

counts, provided i want to take a picture in low light and want it to come out right ...??

i read and reread the manual but it doesn't make sense to me.

anybody out there who could help?

thanks

reinhard

tx, h.p., this might worth a try. as a matter of fact i've got the 7600 visible (apple talk

activated) on the G5, but when double.clicking it denied the file format. other way around

might work, though.

reinhard

hm, odd, my reply from this afternoon vanished ... ?

anyhow: david, i've uploaded 4 images for you. please go to:

http://www.monocrome.de/Temp.html

please keep in mind, that this is a first shot at the back, no tweaking. and also it's an old

(1999) 6MP back and not one of these zillion pixel things, which cost an fortune. but for 700

bucks it might be an alternative for some. not for me - right now - i still prefer my scaned

film images.

reinhard

hi all,

a while ago i've posted a question concerning a Megavision S3 back on a 500C. well, i've

got the gadget, including a really old Mac 7600, including all the paperwork for some 700

euros. and what a surprise! it not only works, but the results seem to be by far superior

compared to my expectations (i.e. using it as a inexpensive way to replace polas). i have

not yet figured out a way to have my G5 under OS X.4 communicate with this dinosaur, as

ethernet cannot read the 7600's discs. but an old SCSI CD burner will do for now.

especially for complicated flash setups it is a fast and easy way to try things out before

you start shooting film. what can be seen on the monitor the pix actually come out really

nice, maybe worth looking into a couple of prints. and although we'Re talking only 6 mp

here, the results are in no way comparabel to, let's say, a Nikon D100.

bummer, though, Megavision's page is sort of dormant, no new drivers available, although

there's one, supposedly, for OS 9, download not possible.

anybody out there using this tool and could share some light?

thanks

reinhard

hi all,

i've just won an auction for the above mentioned S3. purchase price was ridiculously low. the

idea was to replace the costly Pola method - especially when trying out lots of different flash

setups, i sometimes use 2 packs per session... - with the back. now, after talking to the

seller, he was head over heels about it's possibilities, being capable of much more. has

anybody out there used it and could share his experiences?

thanks, any answer will be appreciated

reinhard

whoa! is that a flame? :-) whatever, i hope you don't mind my calling you beholder, then.

again, for my type of picture taking, the difference does not matter. sharpness and fuzzy

edges is not really an issue when doing portraits, now is it? and, provided it does not matter,

what's the point fiddling around with extensions and a calculator. and again, they are sitting

on a shelf, not because of lazyness but because of simple pragmatism. given, "my way" might

not yield satisfactoy results if you'Re into macro-shooting flowers or 1:1's of your stamp

collection.

and if not convinced, yet, i'm more than happy to post examples ...

my 0.2: i love the Proxare, as a matter of fact i've got two complete sets. as you probably

know you can stack them, thus getting enormous magnification for macro. never noticed any

degrading no matter what the theory says - at least with my kind of shooting, portraits only. i

also do own all available extensions, which keep sitting unused on a shelf. you lose light and

with most Blad lenses this is a real nuisance. on top, unless you have a metered prism, you

have to do your own math in order to get a decent exposure ...

hi all. given, i love the look of analog, respect. analog shot and then scanned MF. but

seriously: after spending 50 bucks on film and another 50 bucks on developing, spending

two nights scanning ... and all this for just one face, one portrait, this makes me wonder.

has anybody out there really worked with an C/CM plus the V96C? especially b/w and faces.

does the back allow b/w previews? will the 'Blad "magic" survive the digi-back, or might a 5D

yield the same results. or, to wrap it up: should i stick with analog? how about the sensor

size, will this alter my lenses?

help, as always will be appreciated.

reinhard

frederick, funny that you mention it. same thing here: compared to my favourite film, Fuji

Acros, i never warmed up to Ilford XP2 B/W, which bugged me, cause c41 is just so

convenient and fast. so today i shot a test-roll just for the heck, same silly person (me) at

400, 200 and 100, flash and tungsten. with a M3 and a 50 'Lux. processing was done in a

regular one-hour-shop, scanning with an Espon F-3200 and Silverfast with the

recommended setting. the results were, at least to me, very surprising. the film basically

works not only with 400, but also with 200 and 100. no problem whatsoever, although i

might add, that i am not concerned about grain, i rather like it. XP has a contrasty and

harsh feel and not the flat-ish TMax look (apologies to the one's who like it...). to wrap it

up, it might be a real alternative. enclosed please find an example ...

reinhard<div></div>

marc. you will find a pic here ... http://www.monocrome.de/Temp.html. i added a crop. film

used was Fuji Acros with 8/125.

marc, search the archives. i posted a similar question a while ago. 1. my "testings" did not

come to much. basically, at least that's my experience under studio/flash condition, the

difference between properly focusing and just leaving the ring at "infinity" was not ovious to

my eye. 2. it's heavy , no doubt about it. 3. minimum focus is, i guess and if i recall correctly

at 70 cm. 4. i use the lens for general purpose and am more than happy. AAMOF i just did a

portrait session two days ago - strictly hobby - and the results came out just fine. i'm more

than happy to post one of the pics, just let me know.

reinhard

regina, i had the the 85 1.4 on a Nikon D 100 (...well). i loved the glass, i hated the camera,

sold the whole lot. a 150, or even sometimes better, a 250mm on a Hasselblad is something

completely different. equally good i find my 140mm on a RB. comparing the two is a matter

of taste and not quality. from my very limited amateur experience i'D recommend MF, if you

can live with the much slower lenses.

reinhard

ok, this works now. and here, in comparison, a portrait with the 50mm 'Lux. very grainy,

available light ...<div></div>

craig,

this is an example of a 75 'Lux on a M3. although it has been reported that this is the way to

go, i neither really find my 50mm 'Lux inferior for portraits, nor do i find the nose overly

pronounced. it is true, though, at least for my taste, that a 250mm on a 'Blad creates a

somewhat flatter image,

but the difference between a 50 and a 75 doesn'T seem to be dramatic. on top: at least for

me, the 50 is easier to focus, smaller and more versatile ...

reinhard

terry, i always try to focus on the eyelashes, that usually gives you the eyebrows plus the lips

in focus as well. "try" meaning, that sometimes it's hard, not so much with Hasselblad and

Mamiya, but especially with my M6 plus the 75 'lux and, as i learnt here, it's known tendency

to flare. and although it's kind a cliche to shoot portraits with minimum DOF i still love it

anyhow. this is where the Proxar come in, they allow you to get real close, DOF might be as

little as 2-5mm, this translates into a tenth of an inch (i guess).

terry, just my 2 cents, strictly amateur: beware of DOF, depending on how close you get,

focusing on the nose might give you the eyes out of focus, when you're wide open. at least

that's been my experience with the 150 when i take real close headshots - obviously even

more so, when a Proxar has been added. naturally, i guess, this cannot be the problem

outdoors.

i agree, hakon. personal pick-up sounds trustworthy. i'm really curious how much he's gonna

get. what do you guys reckon? there are a couple others around, e.g. an Imacon V96C right

here in Berlin.

so, should we estimate? :-)

i'm sure the price for this package is gonna hit the roof ...

i guess you have to paste the two lines together, though.

http://cgi.ebay.de/H1-Hasselblad-Kit-with-80mm-50-110mm-96C-digital-

back_W0QQitemZ7580345405QQcategoryZ31388QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

ernie, if you want to do some looking around, you might find a used SWC with the

(unbeatable) 38 biogon for not much more than a 40mm. i use mine seldomly, though, but

the pics are outstanding.