trixshooter
-
Posts
64 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by trixshooter
-
-
My firm is considering purchasing a P25 back and Arca Swiss F Metric
6x9 to shoot architectural projects. Based on what I have read here I
asked them to consider a Canon 1DsMkII with T&S lenses.
The office manager does not have a great handle on this issue and
neither do I as most of my work has always been film based.
Any qualified opinions would be very helpful, especially from
professional photographers using these puppies to make a living as
the demands may not be the same as fine art image makers.
Thanks
-
I have given it much thought.
When my current batch of Tri-X is exhaused I an finished with Kodak.
Ilford has made it perfectly clear that they intend to support the
film segement of the market, introduce new products, and reintroduce
formerly discontinued products.
I can not support a company who does not support my needs and who
will, I have no doubt, drop all film products in short time.
Sour grapes? No, not really. Disappointed, yes. I just choose to
spend my money where I feel it is appreciated.
-
This is a fairly common problem especially with staining type developers such as Pyro. Many people blame agitation and in essence it is an agitation problem. As explained above, the developer along the edges is NOT being replaced as it exhausts itself.
The clearly simple solution is NOT to fill your tank to the top. This will allow air to displace the developer as you invert and will aid in thoroughly mixing the developer throughout the tank as it exhausts.
I have seen people fill their tanks to the top with Pyro developer, wind up with edge density issues and then solve the problem by limiting the amount of developer in the tank.
So in reality, it is an agitation problem, but you will not be able to obtain the most efficient and greatest agitation pattern if the tank is completely filled with no air avaible to help mix the developer.
-
Yes Al, I was referring to Corre.
-
"I've gotten scores of emails thanking me for my comment above and dozens of requests for prints of pics in my portfolio. Please, fans, keep the RMB's coming cuz electrons ain't free."
Sorry to say, but the old adage that people who live in glass houses should not throw stones. In all honesty your portraits are pretty pedestrian and boring.
Glad to hear that business is booming and your prints are in such demand.
Warmest regards,
Jay
-
Isn't New Jersey run by Liberals? Or Democrats?.
What's up with that?
-
One more thing.....I would MUCH rather see these images of Al's that to read another inane and brain dead post regarding Bokeh.
-
Actually, these images are a lot of fun. I find it highly interesting to see Al's life. Something that is unique and something that I have not seen elsewhere.
As for those that bash the technical aspects, get a life, these are posted in fun for fun. Lighten up and enjoy.
Al, keep up the fine work. I enjoy your images and postings.
-
"Beware as there are two different Tri-X, don't buy Tri-X Pan but buy Tri-X 400."
Why not buy 320TX (Tri-X Pan). It is a great film if you know how to use it.
-
Folks,
Met with the bank on Friday and there is no problem. Our account is insured up the $100,000 against fraud and loss. Now that they have been notified, there is absolutely no liablility on the part of my company.
BTW, they tried to pass another $5,000 check on Friday. Bank refused payment.
-
Ahh, nice work.
Tri-X is certainly one of the most amazing films ever made. And Rodinal, well IMHO it is one of the greatest developers of all time.
-
Recently I was selling an old camera on Ebay. After the auction
ended (the item did not sell) I received an email from a potential
buyer supposedly in the UK telling me he decided to buy the camera
after all. He asked to wire the money as it would be secure and
fast.
I provided my business bank wire transfer info as wire transfer
fraud is almost non existent and very difficult to do. A few days
went by and I heard nothing.
All of a sudden I noticed that a company called QCHEX was issuing
bogus checks against my business account to the tune of $5,000 a
pop. After notifying the bank of the situation they placed the funds
(now about $30,000) back into my account and launched an
investigation.
The really sad part is that the people who accepted the counterfit
checks began calling me and were obviously quite upset that they had
been scammed for thousands of dollars. I really felt bad for them
but there is nothing that I could do.
I immediately opened a new account and changed out account numbers.
This has been a pain for me and a nightmare for the retailers who
are out tens of thousands of dollars. The bottom line is watch your
accounts very carefully. The investigators tell me that the
perpetrator is in Indonesia and has been running these scams through
QCHEX.
BE VERY CAREFUL!
THE WORLD IS FULL OF DEAD BEATS.
-
I know you did not want to buy another developer, but Diafine will give you peace of mind in this instance. I am not a fan of Diafine, but this is one case that I find it to be very useful.
-
The sure fire way to save this film is to process it in Diafine. You will wind up with very printable negatives and little worry.
-
Here is my processing time for 400TX which will give you excellent negatives for printing on a diffusion enlarger with a gamma of .5.
Kodak 400 TX
Rodinal 1:50
70F
7 Minutes
EI-200
-
As a dedicated Tri-X shooter I regular use both films. My personal favorite is 320TX in Rodinal 1:50 70F 10 minutes. Rollo Pyro is my second choice.
The main difference between the films is that 320TX has a slightly up swept curve. I find this feature to add that special "pop" to highlight, especially when processed in PMK or ABC+ (Rollo Pyro) to counteract lowering of highlight values. Even with the upswept curve, highlights do not block up and look wonderful.
320TX also has slightly higher shadow contrast when overexposed to get the toe up an out of the base thresold.
All in all, 320TX is a wonderful film. It performs superbly out of the studio contraty to what many folks think. Give it a side by side comparison
-
just rate it at 1600 with that developer sequence and you should be in good shape.
-
I don't have a scanner so I had to shoot the print with a digital camera. Obviously the uploaded image does not show the extraordinary sharpness of the original sepia toned silver print, but I think you will get the idea.
Shot on the 905SWC, Tri-X, zone focussed.
<center>
<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/3396471-sm.jpg">
</center>
-
Recently I was shooting stills for a documentary with my 905 SWC. We were on a cattle ranch shooting the crew castrating calves, administering antibiotics and vitamins as they were herded into the chute. The images produced with teh 905 were simply spectacular even though they were handheld. I shot as suggested about with DOF adjustments.
Take the time to practice and you will soon find using the camera second nature. You will be rewarded with rich and vibrant images with that 38mm perspective that many find so appealing.
-
"But I'm distracted by what looks like ugly bokeh, partlcularly the donuts in the trees behind the young woman."
What?
You are kidding right?
I think you have been hanging aroiund Dunkin Donuts too long long in the mornings.
-
After waiting for 6 months, my new Leica 50mm Summilux-M Asph arrived
today. I loaded up a roll od Tri-X and set off to make some greatest
hits.
Processed the film and I am duly impressed.
Nice lens.......
-
Jeez, and if I remember correctly some slob was blaming the Busg Administration for the ban.
Really makes you wonder.
-
Answer to your questions;
1. No <p>
2. No, great deals abound on used gear. You will save the depreciation of new equipment the minute you leave the store.<p>
3. Any of the bigger dealers. Ebay is NOT a problem as long as you take the proper precautions. Use their Escrow service.<p>
4. Not sure.<p>
-
Hey Gabriel, I guess you missed the winking smile face at the end of my comment. Ease up dog, it was a joke.
Digital MF vs 35mm
in Medium Format
Posted
After reading all of the "expert" posts here I have to say that some of your self proclaimed experts are much too impressed with yourselves.
Have you see the output from the leaf Aptus 22?, The Phase One P25? or some of the other MF backs?
Forget the stupid half witted reviews that guys like Mike Johnston write. These guys know jack about real photography.
Take a look at some of the work being done by the real photographers with these backs. It is not only about megapixels, it is about chip size, sensor size, pixel size, and the optics.
The Leaf Aptus 22 has a look all it's own, very close to Fuji NPS. Phase One is also nice. FWIW, knocking the MF work to promote Canon and Nikon products is just immature nonsense.
My Phase One back out performs the Canon 1DsMkII by a long shot. Don't read reviews, test them side by side.