darkprints

<p>Where the Epson 3880 installer puts the file "Pro3880.profiles":<br>

Root > Library > Printers > Epson > InjetPrinter2 > ICCProfiles<br>

Copy the file to: Root > Library > Colorsync > Profiles<br>

Also copy (if you use Photoshop or InDesign) to: Root > Application Support > Adobe > Color > Profiles</p>

<p>IJFR works great, but not under OSX10.6.<br>

I'm looking for an alternative that's compatible with Snow Leopard.</p>

<p>I have the tripod holder (came with 3N1-20) and I don't see a design flaw. Try writing to Kata in Israel - Katia Shulkin is the marketing person: < katia.shuklin@kata-bags.com ></p>

FWIW - I just posted in the classifieds a new/unused Beattie split image screen for sale - $175. It sells for $273.50 at B&H.

Dilution H (1:63) calls for 4 ml. per 8 oz. (250 ml.)

 

Covington had originally stated 3 ml. per roll, then without explanation changed it to 6 ml.

I'm wondering if there was a reason for the change.

Is there a definitive consensus on the minimum amount of HC110 syrup needed per roll - 3 ml. or 6 ml.?

By roll, I mean 80 sq. in., or 135-36, or 120.

 

And does anyone have first hand experience finding that 3 ml. is not enough?

 

I can't recall why the recommended amount changed from 3 to 6 ml.

Please disregard my previous post - the Nikor reels have been sold.

If anyone is looking, I have four 120 Honeywell Nikor reels for sale. Perfect condition. Send PM for more info.

Has anyone had any success w/ this combo? I only use Rodinal or HC110, and don't

wish to add another developer.

 

In the past, I haven't liked the t-grain films, preferring Tri-x for 35mm, and

APX100 for 120. Is the new 400TMX going to change my mind?

Id anyone is interested, I have 13 rolls of APX25 135-36 for sale on an auction site - ends Nov-14-07 18:27:10 PST.

Holgaroid - shoots approx. 3 1/2" sq. image. Polaroid makes the back specifically to fit the Holga.

Is this for a wedding? If the wedding couple would like to pass the negs onto their great-great-great grandkids, then the issue of archival permanence should be considered. I would vote for Tri-X or other silver-based film instead of a C-41 medium. Just my opinion.

It would be helpful if you would make a statement regarding what you were trying to achieve. Without knowing your intentions, these are just photos "of" things, but not "about" things.

I received a response today from Fuji:

 

"Dear xxxxx:

 

Thank you for contacting Fujifilm, USA's Contact Center. Please allow us to assist you.

 

Please be advised that Neopan 100 SS black and white film is not

imported into the United States. Therefore, we do not have information regarding its availability nor can we offer support for it...."

 

I was hoping to try SS100 as a possible alternative to 120 APX100, but it seems SS100 (and 1600) is not made in 120.

Fuji no longer lists Neopan SS100 on their website. Has it been officially

discontinued and/or no longer imported/sold in the US?

"I know that I filled the canister with the full amount of liquid."

 

"It could be true that I put in to little liquid."

 

???

Robert - Thanks for the info. I'll be prepared when I give it a try. Now that Agfa APX 25/100 are gone, I'm looking for a replacement.

So, do they still have the soft emultion problem? And does the 120 still have the curling film base problem?

Re: Adox 25 & R50 -

 

Do these films still have the soft emulsion problem requiring hardening fixers?

 

Do they do well in Rodinal, or would Beutler be better?

 

Phil

Obviously the name of the company has changed. Daniel's query is: has the film changed?

Allan

 

I'm in the same boat - APX100 + Rollei + Rodinal 1:50. As you probably know, Diane's favorite was Adox 17, ASA 32, developed in Beutler. This might a better starting point in the search for a new emulsion. Any opinions on how the current offerings compare?

Mike- I did consider the Acratech, as it's in the same ballpark. However, the consensus is that it won't hold the same weight as the others. My situation is that the Hass + 40mm (about 5.5 lbs.) will not be mounted directly over the ball - the weight will be off-center about 6". If the camera were mounted over the ball, the Acratech would be fine.

I'll restate my query: I'm interested in the Kirk BH-3, the RRS BH40, and the Markins M10 and would like to get articulate opinions from people who have had hands-on experience with these ballheads - not theory or conjecture. I'm not interested in the Arca-Swiss B1 or the Acratech.

 

 

Thanks

Edward - Thanks for your reply, but... as I stated, I already own a Studex (purchased new 30+ yrs. ago) and the PCL-1.

 

My query was: Do you own or have used the RRS BH-40 and have compared it with the Kirk or Markins, and have an opinion based on your actual usage?

I'm about to spring for a ballhead to go with my RRS PCL-1 panning

clamp and Gitzo Studex. I'm shooting panos, and my heaviest gear is a

Hasselblad w/ 40mm - and because this heavy load is cantilevered way

off balance, the large Leitz ballhead I've been using is no longer

adequate. (The Leitz is great for the TLR Rollei, though.)

 

So, has anyone been able to compare the Kirk with the new RRS BH40

and/or the Markins M10? I'm interested in the Kirk because it's nearly

$100 cheaper (I'm financially challenged), but, if it doesn't compare,

it would be a $100 waste. I'm willing to spring for the RRS or Markins

if it's really worth the difference.

 

I'm interested in hearing opinions based on hands-on experience.

 

Thanks in advance

Phil