art_arkin

A couple of years ago I bought 20 dirt cheap rolls of Agfa Scala

(without the processing vouchers). I exposed just a few of these and

have now learnt that Scala processing is no more.

Do any of you have experience processing this film in standard b&w

chemistry and if so do you have suggestions on which dev, how long etc.

Does cross-processed Scala have any unique features or does the

process simply produce standard looking negatives?

Many thanks in advance.

Had an .85 M6 classic + an M3 and an M4. Used to use the M6 and M3 but after Peter at Luton Leica overhauled my M4 classic I immediately fell in love and sold the M6. Now the M4 and 3 have me fully covered. M3 for 50 and 90mm, M4 for 35mm and below. It's all I need though I'd probably treat myself to an MP if I struck gold.

I meter using a tiny gossen digisix pocket model but since selling the M6 I've gotten to the point where I can make do just fine without a meter altogether.

You haven't shot rangefinder until the light readings fly through your mind by feel, unassisted. Everytime I doubt my gut instinct I pull out the Gossen and find i'm spot on at least 90% of the time. The feeling is akin to the day I learnt to ride a bike unassisted. Hard to describe but Im sure most can relate something similar.

Pull the battery out of your Leica for a couple of weeks. Scary I know but you'll be amazed by how fast you learn. HC Bresson didn't need a meter and I now understand why. Freeing yourself from this technology changes the way you look at a scene though this is obviously subjective.

I didn't learn to do this until going Meterless. Let the brain do the work, it's remarkably easy if you give it a week or two of solid photography with just a handheld incident meter for backup.

Dave,

Don't waste your time and more importantly money in the big labs like Metro imaging etc. They are great if you are a busy pro spending min 2 grand a month, then they deliver. Amateur photographera thinking they are getting quality given the high cost in a place like Metro are kidding themselves. Your work goes low priority and is probably done by under paid trainees. What I've seen from these guys is nothing special.

The best black and white in London imho is 'Klaus Kalde', at nr 246 Hackney Road E2. He does all of Jurgen Teller's, Richard Bush's and many other big name pros black and white for good reason. He is the best.

He's been in business for nearly 30 years, does only b&w and is the one who processes and prints your film, not some underpaid wage slave. His prices are better than Metro&co and when you drop off the film you can discuss how you want the film processed, contacted and or printed.

Give him a try 0207 729 5278

Cheers,

Arthur.

I've had a 1500 installed and running for some time and wouldn't want to process my films any other way. These machines are going for very reasonable sums on ebay given what they cost new and let me tell you, they are worth every penny, period.

My only manual step in the process of b&W is stop reclamation, everything else is set and forget with identical results, time and time again. There is no turning back once you get used to this.

Before I actually started using the ATL I too was concerned about the lack of a 20 degree option, but fear not. It works splendidly with stunning results.

It may sound crude by purist standards but 24 deg constant agitation is absolutely fine and results in significantly shorter dev times to boot. BTW I always give my films 5 mins prewet, this has never failed me once. Initially I followed photo.net advice with shorter prewet times and only found problems. Stick with 5mins, take my word for it.

Atl wonn't give you the hand tank satisfaction of a sore wrist and watching a clock for. Please disregard any negative posts on the Atl 1k-1500 series. They are probably by people who've never used one. Also remember, this is not an CPE/CPA machine. I think many negative opinions on the Atls are based on actual experience with the much more common CPE type and a subsequent assumption that an atl must be the same, just full auto. Not so, I've not had a film go bad since installing this wonderbox. It has much better temp stability than a CPE as well.The Atls are simply in another league alltogether despite working on essentially the same concept.

The atl 1K is fine for most b&w btw, dont pay more than double for a 1500. Get a 1K and upgrade it later. The conversions show up on ebay from time to time.

All best.

Medium format or DSLR, doesn't matter. Just make sure its black, huge with a whopping great lens hood. Great for the type of bird photos one may encounter whilst cruising the seas.

Oh and dont forget the portra nc, great skin tones!

Enjoy yourself.

Must add my respect to the camera related attention to detail in 'Closer' though it isn't quite perfect. The Hasselblad is at the wrong height during J.Law's headshot session though this is obviously nit pit picking and the scene works beautifully from a film/aesthetic perspective.

The square crop of Natalie Portman's character looked great, The rest of the exhibition was square, Leica 3:2 frame would have clashed imho. Great art direction overall, good film.

Just out of curiosity, was the collapsible cron Bresson's lens of choice or can someone confirm it was in fact an elmar? Most photos of him shooting appear to be with a collapsible of some sort.

Sure it's the photographer and not the lens that matters but I'd like to know nonetheless.

Thanks.

Oi... don't knock the Gitzo twist locks

I couldn't stand twist lock at first until I was given a little Gitzo reporter. After a few days I adapted and suddenly realised just how great they actually are and now I wouldn't use anything else. This is not unlike the transition from SLR to rangefinder for many people. Takes a little time to get it.

The worst in my opinion are Manfrotto's horrible clips which can really bite your fingers if not careful. Horrible on a freezing day.

Gitzo rocks!! speaking of which, check the new Basalt Gitzos. Saw them at the last photokina. They're great and cheaper than Carbon fibre.

Did quite some research on this precise application recently. My conclusion was a Gitzo 1128 CF with a small cullen ball head.

This tripod is very small yet extends to a good height and so incredibly light weight.CF means its ultra rigid so a reasonable weight on the hook ensures it performs like a steel monster.

Sure its pricey but there is no excuse to never carry it. Whats the point in saving money on a heavier/bulkier type when you'll leave it behind which you will.

The Cullen ball head is small (but not too small) and has built in pan. It's also very cheap.

Cheers.

Neopan 1600, or tmax 3200 make a beautiful companion to Tri-X. Grain is good and to me Leica M is all about shoot anywhere, wide open available light.

Give fuji acros a blast if you like ultra fine grain, high contrast razor sharp or panF for that smoother look. FP4 as mentioned in umpteen posts above is obviously great and ever versatile.

Just completed shooting a band on tour. In short, I would have been lost without the 90/2. They had good lighting which granted me speeds of 250-500th @ f2 using 800 press. Jazz gigs tend to be darker but you should be fine. maybe get a small monopod to buy you an extra stop. If careful you'll easily get away with a 60th @ f2 if not 30th using the 90 with 3200.

The 75 is a nice portrait lens, very beautiful and may be the ticket for a jazz club but I'm totally sold on the 90/2. It's so utterly sharp and contrasty wide open. Monopod with 3200 delta or tmax will yield plenty of keepers, I promise you even with no monopod, just push 6400. Grain, contrast and jazz go hand in hand after all, frankly I think 3200 or 6400 with both of these emulsions is neither here nor there but it does give you about a stop. Try it, I bet you'll be suprised.

Good timing guys, been meaning to post for a while.

I own a chrome fat tele-elmarit and due to circumstance may need to sell it. Yes it's one of the only 300 odd in existence and will never lose value.

Will photograph and post an image or three in the coming days if time permits. Meanwhile, I'm open to offers.

Granted, it's not as sharp or flare resistant as modern equivalents but it makes a stunning portrait lens with the creamiest old style oof rendition. Flare supression is fine with the hood btw and more than sharp enough but above all a safe as Tokyo houses investment.

Thanks.

Once you adapt to an M rangefinder you'll be hard pressed to pick up an SLR if the situation allows choice of either. I love my SLR, a Contax RTS II as much as my M3 and M4 but fact is that 90% of my 35mm photography is done on the Leicas. With an M I get the shot 90% of the time. In my opinion the real pros of M rangerfinders go:

1- Nearly silent

2- Less vibration granting at least 1 extra stop in any given low light situation.

3- Ultra precise focusing in very low light situations where even the best and brightest slr screen would let you down.

If you decide to go SLR then consider the Contax RTS II which I recommend highly as an alternative to the R6. The Zeiss optics are as good as Leicas, It feels and handles very similarly to the R6 though the RTS II is electronic and thus dependant on power but this aspect hasn't been a problem. Much cheaper than the R system as well, just as good.

I say buy an M3, a 50mm Cron or the new Zeiss 50 Planar plus a Gossen digisix pocket meter, an indispensable tool. This meter is so small it fits in any pocket and so always within immediate reach. I don't need in camera metering anymore.

This setup would probably cost the same if not less than an R6. M3s are stunning cameras built to the highest standard. A real joy to use particularly if serviced every 3 to 5 years. Beats the pants of any M6 build and solidity wise and you just don't need the built in meter with the above mentioned Gossen meter. CLAd M3 and a 50mm lens, doesn't get better in Leica.

Most probably sponsored by Hermes in one way or other or perhaps the photographer thought it appropriate to flaunt his/her collection.

Will look it up next time I visit the local library (Borders).

.85 M6 with a 35mm asph was my combination for a while. It's a difficult mix requiring a fairly steep learning curve as ones eye really has to scan the whole frame. You just can't take in everything at once, particularly when wearing glasses but it does force you to learn the process of intuiting a composition quickly which is a good thing. I got a diopter lens which really helped.

I moved to .85 from a .72 body with initial regret. 35mm compositions went sloppy as a result but once my brain rewired itself I found that I?d stumbled onto a different compositional style and am glad in hindsight that I went .85

I am now back to .72 on a late 60s M4 and must say that I?m happier as 35mm is my main lens though the above mentioned combo did teach me a lot and I recommend you persevere should it not agree with you at first. It's a bit like learning guitar on a nasty high action instrument then moving to a beautiful strat. You suddenly fly effortlessly, a real joy.

Obviously 50 and 90 are brilliant on a .85 and I could easily have gone on shooting 35mm forever but I got seduced by the mechanical perfection of old Wetzlar bodies and sold the .85 M6. These days my kit consists of an M4 .72 for 35mm and a late M3 .95 for 50 and 90. Can't recommend this enough if one can get by without a built in meter.

Seriously, take this from an M3 shooter. A Gossen digisix is all you'll ever need period.

Most importantly, it's always there ready for action within seconds unlike a larger 308 (or similar) buried in your backpack. This may not seem far but believe me you'll pass up countless great photos due to the hassle of having to stop and dig around your bag in a crowded street.

Digisix in your jeans pocket and an m3 on your shoulder is the way to go. You just don't need any thing else unless you are into zone system which is not a Leica thing anyhow. Keep it simple.

Just to clarify,

This will be a Non-Fiction book documenting a group of shows on the band's US tour, on and off stage. My main question is about photographs of very large audiences. Do I in effect have to get releases from every single person depicted (as ridiculous as that may sound) Could a just recogniseable individual picking their nose in 16th row suddenly try on some kind of legal action?

The "whole audience" shots will be taken in a concert hall, i.e. on private property and the book will be published outside the US.

Marilyn Madonna Manhattan

Shot on September 10th 2001<div></div>

Here is a thought,

I have this strange (and scary) feeling that photo.net has reached

critical mass and that our typo ridden posts will somehow outlive us

all.

What do you reckon?

(Hi great great grandchild ;-)

Good point.

What I mean by "Authorized" in the heading is that I am there by invitation of the band as opposed to an audience member strobing away without permission in the front row.

What I'm trying to clarify is whether I will be forced to fill the frame with just the band during their performances or actually do what I?d like, which is to make much more engaging images by covering both audience and band equally. Maybe even visually capture the synergy of what makes good concerts so special. I?m bored to tears by the traditional pit style 80-200mm concert snap.

To the first reply:

The images are for editorial use. Though published in the UK there are plans to handle US distribution through a local company. What are your thoughts on this?

Naturally I will get all the necessary legal advice closer to the time of publishing but I thought this would be a good subject to discuss on Photo.net in advance and may just prove very helpful. There will no doubt be someone considering a similar project in the future with these questions so lets enrich this great archive of discussions and thoughts.

Mentioning the future, here is a thought. I have this strange (and scary) feeling that photo.net has reached critical mass and that our typo ridden posts will somehow outlive us all.

( Hi great great grandchild ;-)

Hello fellow forum members,

It appears a couple of Leicas and I are heading for USA to collect

material for a forthcoming photographic book about a band on tour.

They have a very culturally diverse fan base and I intend to do

a "waist up" style portrait series as a side theme. Naturally I will

be requesting model releases from everybody but in addition I'd also

like to shoot a "whole audience" portrait from the performers

perspective on stage. What does US law say about publishing such an

image? Who would hold control of rights? the venue, the performer,

myself or every member of the audience pictured.

Another thing, the band will be playing with a 50 piece orchestra.

Somebody mentioned that US orchestras are heavily unionized and any

image picturing them could cost a fortune to clear. Do you have any

clues as to where I might stand with this situation or could find

out. Perhaps one of you has a similar experience to share?

Many thanks in advance.

My 68 M4 was in bad need of a CLA so I sent her to Peter at CRR

Luton.

http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Leica/

This is a post in praise of his amazing standard of service and

work. US based Leica techs Sheri and DAG are often mentioned on the

forum but I thought I'd add Peter to this list. He is a true master

craftsman and CLA wise it simply doesn't get better.

My girl is crystal clear, purring like she did in 68 and ready for

work.

Davs Leif,

Det er nok et godt par år siden jeg blev en udenlands Dansker så jeg er ikke helt sikker, men det han kalder en "easel" hedder en 'Klapramme' på Dansk.

Du skal helt enkelt Løfte apparatet den samme højde som klaprammens overflade sidder over V35s bord.

God lykke,

Arthur.