art_arkin

Back to the original question.

 

Having read just about every book on the shelf, one stands heads and shoulders above the

rest.

 

"Way Beyond Monochrome"

 

by Ralph W. Lambrecht & Chris Woodhouse

 

ISBN 0 86343 354 5

 

Check out the website:

 

www.darkroomagic.com (no that is not a typo) and click the 'book' link.

 

'Way Beyond Monochrome' is an absolute masterpiece! Buy it, you'll know what I mean the

moment you turn the first page. Meanwhile download a couple of PDFs from the website.

Even the most experienced darkroom worker should take a look at this.

 

It holds all your answers. A brilliantly researched and written 'Dark room bible' !

 

Enjoy.

I have a 150mm f2.8 F series lens plus long term loan of a 180mm CF. Though this particular 150 is fantastic I haven't used it once since my first roll with the 180 which is spectacular in every way. Do keep in mind that you will need a 16mm extension tube for tight square format headshots. 180mm, like the 150 remains a shoulders up portrait lens.

 

My advice is bypass the 150 if you can afford to.

Hello,

 

I second most of the posts above. My first lens was an 80mm CF which I recently sold to buy a 100mm CF. There is no question that the 100 is noticeably superior in performance, I tested both extensively prior to selling the 80. The difference in angle of view is slight and half a stop is nothing with modern film emulsions. I would not go back to the 80mm unless starting from scratch on no budget.

 

The 100mm comes highly recommended if you can justify the extra cost and look to add the 60mm at some point in the future. 60 / 100 / 180 is imho the perfect Hasselblad kit that guarantees the very finest performance possible.

 

My idea of an ideal kit also includes:

 

An SWC, Xpan, Leica M and Contax RTS series SLR with relevant optics. Linhof technica or an ebony for 5x4, Gitzo carbon fibre tripods and a Lomo. Pricey but seriously fine.

 

The 80mm remains a stellar performer and represents a true bargain but if you like to enlarge with stunning resolution and 'bite' then you can't beat the 100mm corner to corner and don't forget the bellows hood, this really makes a difference.

Could it be that the person who sold you the back accidentally left an A16 insert in the A12 back. The image above shows precisely the result of such a mixup.

 

Cheers,

 

 

Arthur.

The material is called a palpas lining which Hasselblad introduced around the time of the

CX. It is meant to reduce internal reflections and thus increase contrast but short of

shooting straight into the sun or blowing a white studio background too oblivion with 5k

strobes you're unlikely to even notice its effect. This stuff is notorious for cracking but

frankly I wouldn't worry about it as replacement wont affect your cameras performance at

all. Spend the money on an 80's pro hood instead, they really work, have a drop in filter

slot and look great. Replacement will however increase the resale value should you decide

to move to a different body but not by a great deal, certainly less than a service

 

I say go with the hood and don't forget a Metz 45 CL along with the TTL adapter which

really works wonders too if you are into that sort of thing.

 

If you bought the CX for a good price then breathe easy and smile. You got yourself a

beauty.

 

Cheers.

Depending on how much film you shoot, why dont you consider buying a professional roller type c41 film processor as mad as that might sound. Not sure what the situation is in NZ but analogue lab equipment, particularly film procesors like say a Colenta or a Bray magitrak go for practically nothing here in the UK right now. Obviously the market in NZ is smaller but regardless there must be a fair few labs who I bet are dumping (or are about to) their analogue gear. Look at small labs who specialised in wedding / social photography as the majority of their customers are about to or have already gone digital and now send their images to huge online 'farms' for overnight delivery. No doubt the case in NZ too.

 

Ok a bit over the top and latteral but it could work and it really is a lot less hassle to run one than you might think, the only thing is that a roller processor needs a certain amount of film through per week to stay economical but remember they do long lengths of 70mm with ease. Alternatively consider an automated Jobo ATL 1000/1500 processor which would do the trick perfectly and very economically as they have a 70mm spool kit available as an accessory though the length is limited so you wouldn't get 70 exposures, but ey, buy another two or three 70mm backs on ebay for peanuts and you're laughing.

 

The jobo would also give you full flexibility in terms of mixing different emulsions. They're small, super economic, very reliable and go for a song on ebay. A full setup with a tempered water panel can be up and running for under 500 UK pounds. Look to ex military disposals auctions for JOBO processors. They were hugely popular with the MOD here in the UK who are currently going through a massive shift to digital, probably in NZ as well.

Despite the use of a 5 micron filter I still seem to get drying

marks on film, particularly 35mm. Water here in London is quite hard

so I?m beginning to consider going down the water purification

route. There appears to be no shortage of very affordable water

distillation units on the market but my concern is their running

cost. It seems the lower end models take a good 3.5 - 5 hours to

produce a gallon of distilled water. Does this mean the machine is

boiling water all the time? At this kind of rate my electricity bill

would soar through the roof and it would probably be cheaper to buy

pre packaged water at the supermarket.

 

Does anyone know a cheap source of distilled water in the UK? 1

litre costs about 70 pence ( US$ 1.3 odd ) at the super market so

this is hardly a viable route for photographic use but if one could

buy from an industrial supplier delivering 15+ ltr containers for a

reasonable sum it would be of interest.

 

Alternatively you can apparently collect the water from a

dehumidifier though I imagine this would need further filtration to

remove dust and airborne particles picked up in the process not to

mention being much slower.

 

Finally has anyone used 'Brita' type carbon cartridge filters for

preparing final rinse water? These could be a solution of sorts and

very economical.

 

Any thoughts or experiences, much appreciated.

Here are my thoughts on the 35 asph Summilux but do a search as this is a well covered topic.

 

Before the Summilux I had a 4th gen pre asph cron. When the opportunity to buy a lux asph for silly money came along I leapt and sold my cron to fund the purchase. Now that I've had the lux for a couple of years I can can certainly vouch for its strengths, Its magnificent at 1.4 and about as good as it gets in this department.

 

After critically comparing Kodachromes shot with the pre asph cron and the new lux I can confidently state that the cron wins on both micro contrast and bokeh. The Lux's real strength is 1.4 and I wouldn't be without it for this reason but Bokeh wise the old lenses win, at least according to my taste. The lux has a definite signature and it isn't bad at all but I can see how some people may refer to it as clinical.

 

I will certainly buy a 1st or 4th gen pre asph 35mm cron should one pass by, they compliment each other very well and look different enough to justify owning two.

 

If in doubt buy a Cron (1st. 4th gen pre or the asph), the single stop really isn't everything unless you shoot all chrome and believe me, its strengths outweigh the one stop advantage.

Though I have not handled a final production version of this lens, I did get a chance to use a demo at the last Photokina in Cologne. This was stamped with serial number 00004 so my opinion may be based on a barely into production model rather than a real world over the counter example. As a lover of zeiss planars and daily user of Leica camera and lenses I can tell you that in comparison to Leica, Contax and Hasselblad which I use equally, this lens looked and performed like a planar but felt like any other VC lens, i.e. useable but built to a price and I sure as hell wouldn't want to drop it. Though Zeiss no doubt ensures Cosina construct these lenses to their exacting standards you simply cant escape the fact that it feels dirt cheap in comparison to the other zeiss affiliated brands. Saying this I will however almost certainly buy one of these quasi VC planars in the future because its optical signature screams Zieiss Planar, the 50 is very affordable and gorgeous wide open

Many thanks for your informative answers, such a great help. I'm learning fast thanks to you all.

 

The pushed tri-x was in stock D76 for 10:10 minutes which is no doubt an eternity. Could I have got away with doing it for a shorter time or should I use an alternate faster acting dev to push tri-x two stops next time?

 

What is the best way to avoid Dichroic fog and would the age of the film have anything to do with this ? (exposed nearly 2.5 years ago)

 

Thanks again.

My Jobo has been very busy for the last couple of weeks. Yesterday I

noticed two reels showing signs of a silvery deposit after doing

some 120 TRI-X in D76 1+1. The stop I use has been continually

recycled for at least 20 rolls but being an indicator style I've

kept it going as it shows no signs of change other than a very

marginal lightening. Fresh fix is used for every batch, Fotospeed

FX20 rapid at 1+10. The bottle says 2 minutes (hand tank I assume)

though I do it for 6. My very first batch was at 2:30 which resulted

in underfixed, brown stained negs, 6 minutes seems to do the trick.

 

So what could cause the silver deposit on my reels ?, exhausted

stop, over fixing or a combination of both?

 

I just did a roll of 2.5 year old old style 35mm tri-x in stock D76

pushed to 1600 in one of these reels. The negs came out heaviliy

stained by a greeny silvery deposit running all the way down the

edge of the film, the picture area has a lighter uneven cloudy /

foggy deposit which may well be partially related to the age of the

exposed film but as its silvery I figure it must have something to

do with the stained reels. Can the silvery reel deposit transfer to

the emulsion ?

 

Any thoughts or solutions greatly appreciated, particularly on how

to remove the reel deposit.

 

Many thanks in advance.

Mani,

 

In the UK Calumet has them listed for ?3700 odd but this thread is referring to 2nd hand units.

The ATLs were very popular with the armed forces and as they too have gone digital there has been a slew of these on ebay over the last year from dealers who pick up multiple units at auction. They appear regularly and rarely finish for more than ?350, usually ?250.

These prices reflect the current market rate but give it a couple of years and you'll probably find they shoot up in price again. The ATLs really are too good to pass up at current prices.

 

TAS is a different beast and could well compliment an ATL in the lab. Essential if one is short on physical space.

I have one thing to say to anyone that that spends money upgrading a perfectly decent phone from last year on the basis that this has a carl zeiss lens and 2 megapseudopixels:

 

SUCKER! HA HA HA HA HA

 

Saying that I did upgrade to a pda mobile recently so im hardly imune to gadgetism but it allows me to read and answer photo.net posts on the bus with great ease and very economically at that. This may seem pretty laughable to some but carl zeiss on a phone !!! and camcorders for that matter, give m a break.

RQ has a very valid point with the all manual 'Diafine' approach, definitely the quickest

(and dirtiest) solution not to mention cheapest but regardless it still requires your full

attention / time throughout the actual process. In case you really want to go for a fully

automatic machine then consider that prep, clean and shutdown of an ATL 1500

/ 1000 takes about 10 to 15 minutes. Add a final manual rinse in double filtered

water, photoflow, hanging the film and you are looking at around 20-35 minutes of actual

hands on. The time saved by the automated process itself averages between 20 to 35 mins

depending on the dev, significant enough for me and I'd rather spend this time doing

something more useful than agitating and changing solutions.

 

If you only do one or two rolls a week then setting up an ATL could seem to border on the

absurd. RQs suggestion is perfect in this case but now that I have one up and running, I

wouldn't do it any other way and even one roll a month is no bother. Remember that the

ATL gives absolute repeatability and real economy, I love it.

 

Though Diafine is great for available light mega contrast photography, I wouldn't use it for

everything, too flat for my taste as an only dev.

 

On another note the Heiland TAS is a great little machine giving absolute repeatability for

very specific agitation techniques. The inventor and I met at the last Photokina in Heiland's

booth. A great chap who demonstrated the unit by mixing several very potent alcoholic

cocktails in a jobo tank.

Heiland electronics is a great firm, Jurgen Heiland deserves major credit for his efforts. The

TAS is definitely on my future shopping list but for now it remains too expensive (more

than what I paid for the ATL-1500)

 

You are able to consider a second hand ATL 1000 on your budget and as a truly converted

happy user I suggest you don't dismiss it to quickly.

Try the Jessops pro film counter in new oxford street. They had quite a bit on the shelf a

couple of months back (220 format). This emulsion doesnt move in this store so my guess

is you'll be in luck. If not ask them to call their warehouse who can search all the 280 odd

stores, one of the pro stores up north may well have stock.

 

Good luck.

In a nutshell, buy a JOBO ATL-1000 which fits the bill perfectly and regularly goes on UK

ebay for between 2 and 300 UK pounds ( under $600 US ). If lucky you may even pickup

the 1500 which allows full programming of all steps and take note that most 1000s can be

upgraded to 1500 though the 1K is perfectly adequate if you aren't a perfectionist. The

conversion does appear on ebay from time to time.

 

As a very happy owner of the ATL-1500 I cant recommend this machine enough. It does

require a tempered water supply for C41 and E6 but runs just fine on cold water for all

regular black and white 3 step processes ( make sure its filtered ). The beauty of these

processors is absolute repeatability ( keep your dilutions / procedures in check ) plus set

and forget convenience. The other tremendous advantage is their economy, 2x35mm or

2x120 tanks use only 270ml of chemistry, the 5 roll 35mm / 6 roll 120 takes a mere

640ml. The only non automated step i take is stop reclamation. The machine gives me

time to do things like reply to your post (I have a process running right now).

 

Anything else including the lesser manual CPE type jobos requires your attention

throughout the process though these have certain advantages. For myself however I

wouldn't use anything else bar the bigger ATL JOBOs. Saying that, hand tank processing

still has its place in my darkroom but for regular tri-x Ilford Fuji type films in D76 HC-110

or Rodinal etc dont waste your time and money on anything else.

 

All best.

I second the reference to Barbieri mentioned above being the very happy owner of two.

Both were bought on the auction site, an older Densy 501 ( 160 UKP ) and a gorgeous

feature rich and very petite 450e ( 201 UKP ). Hold your hard earned $ for one of these, I

can't recommend either enough.

 

On a side note Barbieri also markets a lab analysis software package which may be overkill

for home labs but is absolutely fantastic if you want to keep track of things C41 / E6 wise

and very affordable for even the smallest business. Great company with tremendous

support for owners of 2nd hand equipment.

 

As much as I have great respect for Jurgen Heiland and his lovely tools I never saw the

sense in shelling out for the TRD series given what ex analogue labs are dumping

beautiful equipment for these days. Even if you dont need colour features right now, I bet

they'll come handy at some point in the future.

This is probably a much covered question but as I use a (programable) Jobo ATL 1500 it

may differ enough to justify.

 

So I shot a 5 pack of the old style 120 tri-x last weekend and therefore seek your opinions

on the best dev time. This emulsion is definitely different from the current generation that

gives a slightly magenta coloured neg. I once did a roll of old and new tri-x in the same

dev tank (35mm) and found the old version had come out significantly over deved. I am

finding that provided the film is given a 5 min prewet, one can generaly go with the

recommended dev time for hand tank inversion processing though this does aparently

vary with the dev / film combo.

 

If it helps I will also provide you some info on the actual photography. The pictures are of

a model sitting by a window covered with white curtains. The afternoon light coupled the

strong diffusion gave a beautiful soft light. A big reflector behind the model yielded

about 3 stops difference between light and shadow. easy for tri-x to handle (i think) The

camera (a Hasselblad) was tripod mounted with exposures of 1/30th at 4 - 5.6

 

Anyone with experience on this combo, please share your times and thoughts. Given the

subject and style described above, would you recommend stock or 1:1 ?

 

Many thanks in advance,

 

Arthur.

I liken the process of focussing a rangefinder by feel to playing a fretless string instrument. Ask any player how they manage to hit the note time and time again with no effort and they'll probably answer, Practise, Practice, PRACTICE. Do your scales for at least 10 minutes a day and in a few months you'll be a mini Bresson.

 

Light readings are the same. I carry the tiny Gossen digisix meter in my pocket at all times. For practice I guess random situations then check the meter which is only ever a few seconds away and it sure beats lugging a Minolta or Sekonic type that requires you to stop, open your bag then fiddle about, often too much effort on the run. The Digisix is one of my best and most indespensable items to date and it uses EV scale which is actually a fantastic system once you get used to it. Highly recommended.

 

Composition, well thats another story.

 

Arthur.

Had a chance to inspect the regular non swc version of this finder at the last Photokina,

demonstrated by none other than mr Kobiyashi himself.

 

I entered the booth with my finderless SWC to personally request another run of this finder

expecting a sales rep only to find Mr K and his right hand man alone and very interested in

my request. They promissed I'd see the finder before too long and what do you know they

did it !

 

Meanwhile he showed me the 35mm rectangular view version and I must say it blew me

away in terms of sheer optical quality. The Hasselblad excuse for a finder pales in

comparison, I would never buy one now unless rediculously cheap. The only problem with

the VC version is the lack of a bubble level which is a serious issue, but despite this its

gorgeous, very well made and worth every cent considering the cost of an SWC.

Go for it before they disappear and they will.

 

Arthur.

Went for it and processed the test roll in D76 stock a touch under fuji's recommended time of 5:15 and the densitometer reads about a third to two thirds of a stop over so I did the rest just under 5 mins and voila, perfect!

Hopefully this info will be of use to someone searching photo.net in the future. A 5 min prewet seems to do wonders for this combo too.

 

Thank you all who contributed to this thread.

 

Arthur.

The test roll was shot with various brackets around the mid.Should also have banged off a whole roll of one exposure for the test you suggest. Much more effective for a dev test. This bracket roll was actually intended for a print test. Will shoot two rolls next time.

 

Cheers regardless,

 

Arthur

As mentioned in another post I have pretty much got APX 100 /

Rodinal 1+50 tamed for my Jobo ATL 1500 (fully programmable time

wise) which delivers stunning strobe lit portrait/headshot negs.

(5min pre wet / 10.1 min dev / 6 min fix and 8 - 10 mins wash)

 

Unfortunately a job came up on very short notice and as these things

usually go, the shop was out of APX 100. Instead I bought Acros but

have yet to test this combo so I?d be very grateful if someone could

kindly offer a tested dev and pre-wet time for Acros in a Jobo

rotary at 24 degrees c.

 

Though very helpful, the Massive dev chart isn?t always accurate for

rotary processing and I'd rather post here first before blindly

going with their time. Ideally a test is in order and I did in fact

shoot a roll of the actor holding a grey card which I'll measure

with a densitometer but I only have the one roll so Id rather start

with a tested time.

 

I have a Gallon bag of D76 which I'll mix if suggestions favour

Acros in this over Rodinal

 

Many thanks in advance,

 

Arthur.

The 5min pre-wet seems to do the trick as far as even development and hitting target

time. It took a few films to realise this after starting at 1 min (bad bad bad it seems in a

1000/1500). Recently I read that 1 min is totally adequate in a rotary whilst the standard 5

min was not recommended but perhaps other developers combined with CPE / CPA

processors (as used by the person who suggested 1 min) yield different results from the

ATL 1k series.

 

Another thing I've noticed is that the time/temp compensation graph published by Jobo in

the ATL 1500 manual is significantly different from the seemingly standard curve

published elsewhere. Perhaps the 'standard' assumes hand tanks. Can anyone enlighten

me on this ?

 

A test is definitely called for but I cant simulate the lighting that these important pictures

were shot under. Neopan 400 will no doubt take tungsten stage lights differently from a

controlled lighting situation with a grey card or am I wrong ? I'd hate to end up with over

developed, blocked highlights.

 

Many thanks.

 

Arthur.

After a several trials with 120 APX 100 in Rodinal Im finally getting my 1500 tamed for this

particular combo and its fabulous.

 

A couple of nights back I got full access to shoot a great concert here in London.

Amazingly Calumet was out of 35mm Tri-X so I went with Neopan 400 instead and rated

it 800. A bit of Googling has pretty much confirmed that straight stock D76 is a good way

to go with this particular push but all published times are for hand tank only. Do any of

you have a good ballpark for the rotary Dev time at 24 degrees c ? They are very important

photos and I cant afford to play around on this set.

 

They were shot using an F1.0 Leica Noctilux and a 1.4 35mm Summilux, a glass combo

which I find great for stage gigs at 400/800 and always ensures plenty of light reaches the

film.

 

Any help or thoughts greatly appreciated.

 

Many thanks in advance.

 

Arthur.