will_legge

An associate's degree is a two year undergraduate degree

A bachelor's degree is a four year undergraduate degree

 

I would put in another vote for RIT (Rochester Institute of

Technology). They have a good program and the equipment and

facilities.

No, don't worry. If this was really a problem, the film back would have been redesigned decades ago.

I would not recommend Lavine. They don't know what they are doing. Sold me half an enlarging lens once.

 

The Konica Hexar Silver is discontinued.

Ricardo, why do you need a rangefinder? If you use the movements on

the Wista, the rangefinder becomes harder to use. If you are using

these on a tripod, ground glass focusing is better.

 

If you want to hand hold these, the Litmman has the advantage. But

you can also use a Cambo Wide with an accessory rangefinder.

I have a 6x12 camera with a 55mm lens. I use a B&W 1-stop center

filter with it. It does a very good job. The B&W filter uses an 86mm

front thread. 86mm filters are harder to find and are expensive. I

bought Contax filter for the center filter - they seem to be good

value, but have a limited selection.

 

I would imagine the B&W would be a good match for a 65mm on 4x5. I

think Schneider says their filters are designed specifically for

their lenses to sell them - if you spend so much money on the lens,

you will do it for the filter. I have heard the Kenko center filters

do not work as well as more expensive brands. I have heard nothing

about the quality of the Hoya filters. I hope this helps.

How is the instruction manual? I find most ditital camera manuals confusing.

I have not seen any color shift with Fuji 400 color negative film at night. Light pollution will cause the sky to turn green, but that is not the film's fault. But I can't imagine you having to worry about that where you are going.

I would imagine Brooks has equipment you can check out. I would wait and use what you have first then buy what you need once you find out what that is.

The equivalent to the 180mm 6x6 lens is about 700mm. The 250 is about

1200mm. Welcome to 8x10.

I print full-frame.

Check the manual in the section on loading the slide mount holder. I

think it is written there. But the simple answer is no.

To add more:

 

Some cameras can take both 120 and 220 film without adapters or

different film backs. Others require different backs for each type of

film. A few can only use 120 only.

I can't think of a single black and white film that can't be used at

night. Perhaps you are having exposure problems. I might suggest

investing in a handheld meter to measure incident light.

 

Are these unprintable or unscanable? Or are you relying on your

neighborhood photofinisher to print these? Negatives have to be

almost bullet-proof to be unprintable if you are printing yourself.

This leads me to believe you are having exposure or developing

problems rather than the film.

 

If it is none of these problems, you could try pull processing to

reduce contrast. I don't recommend push processing as you loss detail

in the shadows and highligh contrast is too much. But it is hard

without knowing what you are photographing as some night scenes are

flat and could benefit from extra development and others are

contrasty and demand reduced development.

I would look for one of the Mamiya TLRs - C220, C330, C3, etc. They

have interchangable lenses and a very healthy bellows draw. Probably

one of the most flexible camera systems for the price. The Chinese

and Russian cameras are certainly a step up from the Holga, but I

think you can find better systems.

I think the RB67 or RZ67 is a good choice. Hasselblad would also fill

your requirements. Do you want a rectangular or square format? If you

want an eye-level camera, the Pentax 67 has the advantage, but a

polaroid back would be an issue. Can you rent some of these cameras?

The camera design can complement or hinder the way you work.

You should not need to tape the film cartridge. The manual ISO overrides the DX coding. The manual is unclear if this resets if the film is changed, but it looks like it does not from your experience.

The flash sync. terminal should be fine. As was mentioned, manual

flash only.

I don't think you are going to find the Pentax 67 much lighter than the the Bronica. The only thing I can think of is rangefinders - Mamiya 7 II, 7, 6MF, 6, or a secondhand Fuji 6x9. The only problem may be the minimum subject distance - about 1m / 3ft. The Mamiya 150mm lens is 1.7m / 5ft. The Fuji rangefinders have a fixed lens. The Mamiyas are easier and more comfotable to hold over the Fuji.

I don't know Jamie, why do you post technically bad photos? You could at least increase the contrast on your black and white work. They are flat.

 

What is the saying about casting the first stone. I would be very careful to be above reproach before looking down on others or their work. This forum is a place to share work and ideas. You should be more tolerant of different levels of skill and experience especially since this is an amateur site.

Holga.

Kenneth, try the astrophotography forums at Cloudy Nights:

 

http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?Cat=

Tim, it seems you have come up empty for responses. I'm not that

familiar with the Hallmark Institute, but if you are looking to enter

commercial photography, I would also consider Brooks and RIT

(Rochester Institute of Technology). Both those schools have great

reputations. I would visit any school you are thinking about to get a

feel for the place and faculty. Each schools has its own culture.

I agree with the other posts. I think exposure and depth of field are

more important conciderations. But I have found with all three lenses

on my Horseman SW612 that the "sweet spot" is at the point where

there is no mechanical vignetting. That is about f/11 in the case of

the SW612. Abberations are minimized and resolution is optimized

across the field. Wider and the abberations and vignetting impact the

image, smaller and diffration begins to have an impact. But it is

still very sharp at smaller apertures. I would imagine around f/11

would be fairly close with the Fuji 6x17 to its sweet spot. You can

always run a test.

You will not find any lenses that can work at the maximum aperture

for astrophotography - abberations at the edge of the field and

vignetting will always be a problem. Prime lenses work better than

zooms and macro lenses are optimized for short subject distances. The

200 f/2.8 should be very good at f/4 or f/5.6. Your 50mm would be

good at f/4 as well.

Jeffery, I would test directly with flowers. The spectural response,

including UV and near IR, can be very different from crayons. The

colors are far more vivid than crayons as well. Also matamerism may

be an issue. While you may see two flowers as the same color, the

film may not because the spectural response between the eye and film

are different. So you may find reproduction of one color group

different from species to species and even within families.

 

As far as testing for specific UV responce with film, I would make

comparison photos with and without a UV cut filter. I know Fuji make

IR cut gel filters with different cut-off wavelengths, they may do

the same with their IR filters.

 

This is an interesting thing you are doing. You may find the answer

is a combination of film and filtering. Are you doing this in the

studio or under natural light. If you are using artificial light,

filtering the light sources may be another solution.