matt_friel

<p>anyone had problems with the last frame being cut 2/3rds of the way in when the film is developed. I used fuji film and made sure that frames 2,4,6,8,10,12 were utlized.</p>

<p>matto</p>

<p>Got one and it is very bright and easy to see through, of course the problem is it does not fit in a conventional shoe. Has anyone adapted it to fit in a conventional shoe like the one fotoman has?</p>

<p>any ideas I have a few but on this forum someone somewhere has probably done it better</p>

<p>matto</p>

<p>sorry about the bad spelling</p>

 

<p>It really isn't that hard, A bit daunting if you have never done it. what I do is of course opent eh lens up to the max aperture, then I start to focus on something at infinity using the ground glass attached to the back. Of course I make sure the ring is loose by using a screw driver that came with an eye glass repair kit. I have a 4 and 10 power loupe. I focus until the image is crhstal clear on the GG and then match up the infinity marker and retighten the ring. Scale focusing is exceedingly handy.</p>

<p>Nice site!! looking forward to the review , I am sure you are busy!!</p>

<p>very curious to read the review when you are done</p>

<p>Okay, I have my first gallery show coming up and need to make the caption cards or submit the information for them. I have some inkjet prints, some on metallic paper from mpix and some black and white from scans. what is the best way to word the types of print that they are, for instance for the ones on fuji crystal archive paper what would be a good way to describe the print? I have the title the size and then I am not sure what to print.</p>

<p>Any help you could offer would be appreciated.</p>

<p>thanks</p>

<p>Matto</p>

<p>Has anybody been to paris recently and bought any spectra or polaroid 600 film? If so where?</p>

<p>thanks<br>

Matto</p>

<p>hey thanks, its a lot easier than I thought!!!</p>

<p>Just a simple question , I was looking at the manual and don't quite understand how to use mirror lock-up, actually the one function that I saw was on page 215 of the manual but indicated it was for cleaning or assessing the sensor, I am not sure if there is a difference but is that the same function you use for shooting an expsoure??<br>

Matto</p>

 

hey its still a canon!! IDK I got hooked on canon and was checking them out until a friend of mine had a D2Xs, I loved the color and never looked back, now don't get me wrong I love my mamiya 7II..

 

but yes tongue in cheek and definitely yawn...nikon is the shit I love my used F5 I just bought!!

<a href="http://s80.photobucket.com/albums/j186/viablex1/?action=view&current=ilforda.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j186/viablex1/ilforda.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

okay,

 

I am knew to this machine. My first scan was a provia 100 chrome and it didn't look to bad. I have a rollei 400IR

shot at 200iso Chrome (converted by David Wood) and I scanned it. It looks great in the nikon Scan window, I save

it and open it up in CS3 to alter it and it looks terrible, extremely grainy and looks way way over sharpened.

 

Things I have tried , I read the manual, it is pretty vague and I have a coolscan 5000 so I have an idea about

the software.

 

I unchecked the super CCD scan button and also any sharpening done with the machine, That time it looked better ,

but not great. I am scanning at super fine 16 bit and 16 X multisampling.

 

I am wondering if it is the intrinsic grain in the film itself, The main reason for my question is, when I have

used the 5000 what you see in the image window after the scan is what you get. This was also the case with the

first color chrome that I scanned with the 9000.

 

Any help from one of you pros would be appreciated.

 

MAtt Friel

Jim Rais , Oct 01, 2007; 06:51 a.m.

 

 

Depends on what you what to do with the films, Sandro. If you're planning to blow up that big, I think a darkroom is better than a scanned film. On the other hand, if you want to use a "real" film scanner, maybe the quality will be even with the ones out of the darkroom. I'm not sure about this, though.

 

I use an ordinary flatbed scanner Epson V700 for all my medium format films myself and at the moment I'm perfectly happy with the results. The main reason for me is that it's a relief to be "freed" from those chemicals in the darkroom as I've developed some allergy (literally) in the past years. Digital darkroom is so much cleaner and my moderate sized prints up to 30x40cm are coming out excellent.

 

 

They definitely look like epson scans, but it doesn't compare to a really good scanner

thanks that is what i was thinking its tanked dammitt, at least i still have the 50mm and the body seems fine ...

well, I hear you with regard to black and white I have some negatives and have a good source for that, but most of my negatives are black and white positives, what I have heard is that you cannot use traditional enlarging methods etc in a darkroom to make prints, they have to be scanned first, Now I am no pro by any means but if the information that have is incorrect and B&W slides can be enlarged in a typical dark room setting then by all means let me know

 

thanks so far for the responses

Okay once again I am asking the pros on here a question. I shoot medium format primarily 6X7 negs mostly

positives both black and white and color. I have a gallery showing coming up in a while and I am looking for a great

scanning and printing service. I have searched the web and found some names but IDK who is any good. I have

found in the past that just because you a great web site doesn't mean you do great work.

So any personal experiences that any of you have had with scanning and printing services woule be appreciated.

 

matto

thanks for your input, it seems fogged on the inside, and the aperture ring won't move at all, but what the hay I am going to try it...

 

matto

really I will do that damn I though it would be tanked, I will try that thanks

I can see them , indicating the damage to the lens. Do you think this type of damage won't impact the image?

Okay here is what it looks like, has anyone used precision camera repair? The guy sounds personable enough but I

am wondering if I should just buy a new lens since the repair will probably be quite a bit of money?

 

Can something like this be fixed to work right??

 

 

matto

 

<a href="http://s80.photobucket.com/albums/j186/viablex1/?action=view&current=_DSC2400.jpg" target="_blank"><img

src="http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j186/viablex1/_DSC2400.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

 

<a href="http://s80.photobucket.com/albums/j186/viablex1/?action=view&current=_DSC2397.jpg" target="_blank"><img

src="http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j186/viablex1/_DSC2397.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

 

<a href="http://s80.photobucket.com/albums/j186/viablex1/?action=view&current=_DSC2398.jpg" target="_blank"><img

src="http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j186/viablex1/_DSC2398.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

I see that now it takes a little getting use to but I can't wait to try mine out!!!

Okay bought a used F5 and it seems to work okay. I noticed however that when I try to select a focus point once

it has been switched to dynamic that you can see it moving around on the LCD but the focus point is not

illuminated in the view finder at all so I have no idea which one is being selected. I thought maybe the person

that had it before me used a custom function to turn that off.

 

Any help or suggestions would be appreciated.

 

thanks

 

matto

thanks, hmmm the marks never match at least at infinity , but i will check it out thank you very much for the link. People on here definitely no whats up ...amazing site..

yes I can try the 65., the 80 or the 50mm...if the calibration is off how would I know blurry images etc??

 

Thanks for the reply..

 

matt friel