Monophoto

Two choices for good views of the GGB -

1. Fort Point - a Civil War era fortification directly underneath the southern end of the GGB.

2. Battery Spenser - this fortification is in Marin Headlands on the northern side. Take the first exit off the 101 heading north, and look for Conzelman Road. There is a parking area on the left just after going under the bridge - you will have to walk about a quarter of a mile from the parking area to get to the fortification. That spot is ideal in late afternoon because the city will be behind/beyond the bridge.

 

There are lots of other interesting opportunities in Marin Headlands. I especially like Battery 128. Muir Woods is nice, but on a busy day you will need to walk pretty far down the trail to find places where crowds thin out. Land's End and Sutro Park (and the ruins of Sutro Baths) at the end of Geary Street. Golden Gate Park is nice - especially the Japanese Garden. Sausalito is nice but can be crowded in the summer. Napa and Sonoma are nice. Also Carmel and Monterey to the south.

When I first started using my darkroom, I used an inexpensive red bulb as a safelight. In fact, I still have it and use it if I need to provide additional safelight illumination in an otherwise dark corner of my darkroom.

 

The bulb I used is readily available at hardware stores and home centers in North America - it's a 7.5 watt spherical bulb about the size of a golf ball.

 

Subsequently, I purchased a commercial safelight that uses an amber filter. Later on, I added a second safelight that I made from a coffee can and a commercial safelight filter - I simply mounted a lamp socket in the bottom of the can, attached the round filter on the open end of the can, and fabricated a mounting bracket from some scrap metal strapping that I had around the house.

If you want to test the LF water, a Crown Graphic is a good way to start.

 

Yes, the movements are limited - it has some swing, tilt and fall, and the tilt is asymetrical (ie, the native tilt is "up" but its possible to modify the camera to tilt down. But you can't have both up and down on the same camera.) As a result, you would be limited in your ability to compensate for converging verticals, or to adjust to maximize depth of field in the foreground in nature work. But that's OK - if and when you find that those limitations impede your vision, you know that the time has come to move on to something else.

 

Most newer Crowns have graphloc backs. In essence, that means that the back and ground glass can be removed. Graphloc backs can still be used with conventional sheet film holders, quickload holders, and Polaroid holders. Actually, having a graphloc back is preferable if you are using the Polaroid 405 film pack holder.

 

You asked how much you should expect to pay - well, that clearly depends on the condition, but a usable camera with a 135mm lens will probably run US$200-400.

 

By the way, most Crowns come with so-called "press lenses". These are lenses that were designed to use on press cameras - the have wider maximum apertures for easier focusing, and the shutters generally don't need to be set prior to each exposure. The downside is that they were less expensive lenses optimized for press use of the 4x5 image frame, and therefore don't have the coverage required to allow you to use the limited movements inherent in the Crown. Again, they are OK as a starting point, but if you get serious about LF you will want a better lens. One of the best press lenses for use with the Crown is the Schneider Xenar 135mm f4.5.

 

There are a lot of things about LF that are different from 35mm and even roll film photography - the need to slow down, focusing on the ground glass, the need to cock the shutter, the need for cable releases, the joys (!) of processing sheet film, etc. A Crown is an inexpensive way to test your ability to cope with these rigors.

Two weeks ago I flew from LA to Boston. As I was clearing security in LA, I overheard a conversation between a couple of TSA agents who disagreed on what should be done about tripods. One believed that they could be used as clubs and should be excluded, while the other believed they were OK.

 

The point is that the rules are open to interpretation, and different agents will interpret them in different ways.

 

My practice has always been to check the tripod, either wrapped in underwear in a large suitcase, or in a dedicated tripod bag. In theory, the former should be safer, but I've had my tripod damaged twice while in the larger bag, but never while in the dedicated bag.

 

Of course, with the airlines charging for the extra bag, there is an attraction to putting everything in one container. But that sets the stage for the airline to claim the bag is too heavy and charge an overweight fee.

Thatcher Park is nice, but its a good two hour drive from the Adirondacks.

 

Where in the Adirondacks will you be? Keep in mind that the Adirondack Park is the worlds largest land preserve - so you need to be a little more specific about your destination.

 

You will definitely be ahead of spring flowers. In fact, it is possible that there will still be snow on the ground. What we call "mud season".

You don't need a meter. A meter is essentially useless for what you are trying to do. For exposures that are longer than a second or so, you have to deal with a phenomenon called "reciprocity failure"; meters won't do that for you.

 

The best suggestion is to find a copy of the old Kodak publication "Low Light Photography". This booklet included a table that suggested trial exposures for various subjects and various film speeds. These trial exposures took into account reciprocity failure for the Kodak films that were being made at the time it was published; modern films will be different, so you will need to bracket quite a bit. Keep in mind that exposures in the minutes to hours range tend to be far more forgiving than ordinary daylight exposures, but some experimentation is still required. And of course there is also the Diana factor.

 

Another suggestion is to search for the website of a group that call themselves Nocturns. These are photographers who work by available darkness - and produce some beautiful work. Their website provides guidance on trial exposures.

Mystic Seaport

Old NewGate Prison

Nope - that results in permanent discoloration of the toes on your left foot.

 

 

Seriously, you can certainly use plastic reels in a stainless steel tank if you can find reels of the proper diameter. Most of the walk-in type reels (eg, Patterson, Yankee, etc) are larger than the typical stainless tanks. But Durst did make a line of plastic reels and tanks that were the same diameter as Nikor stainless tanks. I routinely use these Durst reels in my stainless tanks. They are similar to stainless reels in that the film loads from the center out (ie, tbey are not the ratchet design), but they are easier to load than stainless because the cross section of the material forming the spiral is rectangular. As a result, the film tends to stay in groove better than in stainless reels where the spiral is formed from a round wire.

Dru -

 

The choice between cold and warm tone is an artistic consideration.

 

Traditionally, cold tone papers have been preferred for seascapes, snowscapes, and perhaps architecture, while warm tone papers have been preferred for portraits, for still live, and for subjects involving textured wood. But those rules are very soft and are often broken.

Principles of marketing 101:

 

The price of silver is up.

 

The volume of sheet film being sold is declining. As a result, the base cost associated with manufacturing film has to be spread across a smaller number of units produced. Therefore, the manufacturer has to raise the wholesale price to stay afloat.

 

The rent paid by the dealer is the same or increasing, while the volume of film being sold is declining. Therefore, the dealer has to increase his markup per unit sale to stay even.

I built one - 10" x 14". Wood - I used poplar - to make the frame, and cabinet-grade plywood for the back. I applied a layer of foam topped with a layer of black felt on the back. Ordinary window glass. The back is held in place using four small oak tabs. Each tab is attached to the frame using a single screw such that they rotate to hold the back in place. It was a fun project to build and works well.

Diana -

 

The US is a big place. Any preferences to East Coast, West Coast, Midwest, South. Also, are you interested in any particular subject (eg, nature) or focus (eg, personal style versus commercial)? Color or black/white? Digital or film?

 

There are a number of big name workshops - Maine Photo Workshops is very well known, and Photographer's Formulary has a good series in Montana. Anderson Ranch has a good reputation. My favorite is Peters Valley Craft Center in the Delaware Water Gap area of Western NJ.

 

Also, there are workshops that are organized on an ad hoc basis by some of the same instructors who teach in the major programs. These can be just as good as the majors, but they will necessarily be more limited in scope because they aren't tied to a permanent facility. For example, I've taken several workshops with Ernestine Rubin - two at Peters Valley where we had access to a well-equipped darkroom to process negatives and make work prints, and one in Northern Vermont where we relied on someone to process negatives and make proof sheets for us. So in the latter case we were concentrating more on initial vision and less on the final image.

The situation you describe is not overexposure - it is fogging.

 

While you may be able to prevent fogging (by fixing the door), once film has been fogged, there is no way to undo the damage.

Christopher:

 

The City of NY regulates the use of tripods. As a practical matter, that limitation isn't enforced in areas with low pedestrian traffic, for example, inside parks, but you might get some hassle on sidewalks, especially in the busier areas of mid-town Manhattan. It's possible to apply for a permit. I've never done it but my sense is that the process is designed to be discouraging. Perhaps someone else could comment.

 

As to your sites:

 

1. GE building - I presume you mean the Rockefeller Center building and not the old building at 570 Lexington that's now part of Columbia University. The current GE building faces the skating rink at Rockefeller Center, and you can probably find some nice angles in that area. One strong view might be from the entry on Fifth Avenue. As to the interior - that's a problem. There are tours of the NBC studios, but I don't know if they are organized in a way that allow you to do any serious photography. And unfortunately, you can't just wander in because of post-9/11 paranoia. And as a retired GE employee, I can tell you that getting access with a camera will be very difficult.

 

2. St. Patricks - directly across Fifth Avenue from Rockefeller Center. No problem with access, but I've never tried using a tripod inside. The worst case is that they ask you to leave.

 

3. Brooklyn Bridge - there are several spots in the South Street Seaport area where there are nice views of the Bridge. You can also access the pedestrian portion of the Bridge. There are signs posted on the NYC bridges banning photography - its not clear to me whether that is for traffic control or just more post-9/11 paranoia - but they are regular tourist photo spots anyway.

 

4. Flatiron building - the best views are from Madison Square Park, 23rd and Fifth. Not a problem for exteriors, and probably not a problem with tripods in the park itself, but you could get hassled on the sidewalks surrounding it. I've never been inside, but based on other buildings in NYC, I wouldn't assume that the interior is all that spectacular.

 

5. Washington Square Arch - no problem at all. You can probably get away with using a tripod in the park, and frankly, the neighborhood is quiet enough that you may be able to set up on a sidewalk, especially on a weekday. The only problem could be that there is some event scheduled for the park the day you are there. When we were there last May, there was a festival designed to protest a City regulation banning dancing in the streets, and the park was mobbed.

 

Have fun!

Carol -

 

You've raised several interesting questions.

 

First, the fact that you have expressed frustration indicates that your expectations for the class were not met. So what were your expectations? Were they reasonable? You said you "learned little and wasted a lot of money" - I agree, that's not a good combination, but what did you expect to learn?

 

How was the course described? Was it a survey of fine art photography? Was it supposed to have a historical perspective, or was it intended to look at fine art today?

 

Your wording suggests that the course may have been intended to teach you how to do fine art photography? If that was the expressed goal, then it was clearly oversold because it simply isn't possible to teach someone how to do fine art photography in 8 weeks.

 

The term "fine art photography" is a problem for a lot of people. How do you define it? I went to a lecture at a local college a couple of weeks ago in which a photographer/critic talked about photographic portraiture - and her belief (at least as evidenced by the work she used to illustrate her talk) was that fine portraiture always excluded the subject's face. What? She and I are clearly on different wavelengths.

 

It sounds like someone (the instructor, the school offering the course, or perhaps your interpretation of the description) read into the description that the course was intended as a "how to" course in 8 easy lessons. But how is that possible if there is no clear understanding of what fine art photography is? People have been arguing about that ever since the invention of photography and there still is no consensus (other than that "fine art photographs" sell for more than $17.95).

 

And without belaboring the point of what constitutes fine art photography, I would suggest that it is patently impossible to teach anyone "how to do it" regardless of how much time is available. Sure, you can teach the craft aspects of photography - and 8 weeks may be barely enough time to cover the basics. But "fine art" is not a technique - instead it is an obsession.

 

Finally, I'm intrigued by the statement that the instructor was "considered the best in that field" (fine art photography). Who says so? And how was this assessment determined?

The term "large format photography" generally refers to the use of film cameras with sizes ranging from 4x5 inches and larger.

 

This post doesn't belong here.

Check with the company that provides your homeowners/renters insurance. They may be able to offer a rider on an existing policy to cover your equipment while traveling.

Insufficient developer. The fact that developer leaks out of the tank when you agitate indicates only that the tank leaks, not that you have enough developer.

 

Suggest loading the apron onto the reel, placing it in the tank, and then filling the tank with plain water (without the lid) until the reel and apron are fully covered. Transfer the water to a graduate to determine how much is required to cover the reel and apron. That would then become the amount of developer you should use.

Andrew -

 

The usual safelight filter used in printing is the OA. It's a pukey yellow-amber color.

 

In the distant past, it was common to use a red filter. In the earliest days of photography, both paper and film were orthohromatic, and a red filter was ideal for that material. Some people, myself included, continued to use a red filter with more modern papers just because we had one.

 

The green filter was used for inspection processing of sheet film. Modern films are sensitive to all colors of light, so they have to be processed in total darkness. However, they do lose sensitivity greatly during processing, and it is possible to use a faint green safelight for brief periods after the film has been partially developed. Inspection processing is a practice of looking at partially developed film using a green safelight to determine if it has been processed sufficiently.

 

The advantage of inspection processing is that it allows the processing to be tailored to the needs of individual sheets of film. However, it's an acquired skill and most people have difficult judging when partially developed film is "done".

Chris Waller said "It is relatively inexpensive to set up to process b+w film yourself, and once you are set up, it's not only much cheaper than commercial processing, but you have full control. Go for it!"

 

That's quite true, but you need to understand that there are always two steps involved in the process that goes on between dropping off your exposed film at the processor, and picking up your final prints.

 

First, the film has to be processed to produce a negative. If you are working with T-Max black and white film, this is easy to do and doesn't require a lot of specialized equipment.

 

The second step is making prints from those negatives. That's a more involved process, both in terms of the equipment required and the time involved. Many of us do our own printing, but please understand that getting into printing is much more of a leap than developing your own film to produce negatives. Also, those of us who do our own printing rarely print every negative we produce, while your expectation may be that you will get 36 prints from a 36 exposure roll of film.

 

The point is that if you choose to develop your own film, you may want to have the negatives printed commercially at first.

Re responses from Harry and Colin -

 

the Nikon FE2 has an automatic exposure feature.

 

Now the FM-2 is manual, and mine has served me reliably for more than 26 years.

Many years ago, I took a workshop on the Zone System. I'm glad that I did, because it caused me to become much more disciplined about the technical aspects of photography.

 

And to this day, I will always conduct a film speed test when adopting a new film.

 

But I'm far more interested in producing images than I am in photographing sheets of mat board taped to the side of a building, and the only time I change films is when the film I am currently using as "standard" becomes no longer available. So I make sure that I have careful notes on how to conduct that film speed test, cuz I don't do it often enough to trust myself to remember.

Erin -

 

I owned a Mamiya-Sekor camera for many years. My recollection is that it had a stop-down meter that was engaged by pressing the film advance lever. Mine had both spot and average metering, and there was a switch on the back of the camera to choose the function you desired.

 

In stop-down metering, the meter had no way to compensate for the prospective aperture setting of the lens. Hence, it was necessary to actually stop down to the shooting aperture to meter the scene.

 

The film advance lever is normally held against the back of the camera. To engage the meter, you first pull the lever away from the body to a detent position with the end of the lever about 1/4" away from the body. Then, you frame the subject with the area you want to meter in the circle you see in the viewfinder, and press the lever back toward the camera body. Pressing the lever turn on the meter and also stops down the lens to the hooting aperture. While holding the lever against the body, adjust the aperture setting on the lens to center the meter needle you see in the viewfinder. Then, release the lever and make your exposure. To return the camera to the off position, press down in the center of the top of the film advance lever - the lever will snap back to its locked position against the camera body.

 

My recollection about the battery is vague, but my sense is that Mamiya did not use mercury batteries in this camera. If so, you should be able to find replacement batteries.

 

Mamiya-Sekor cameras were at the lower end of the price range for 35mm SLRs. They were reasonably rugged but VERY heavy.

If you are focusing on the ground glass, the infinity stops aren't all that important. They were really intended for use in conjunction with the rangefinder.

 

I suspect that the bellows on your camera doesn't allow enough extension to have to worry about compensation. However, it never hurts to know what the compensation rules are. The "ten times focal length" rule is one of the better rules. The life size rule (see Ronald's post) is also a good one. Beyond that, you are into exotica. There are a number of aps that run on PDAs that will calculate an exact compensation - I have something called LF exp that converts a metered exposure into an actual exposure taking into account filters, extension, film reciprocity, and perhaps even the phase of the moon.

"You pay your money and take your choice"

 

Both are fine.

 

Liquids are more convenient to mix - just dilute with water. Liquids can be mixed without raising a cloud of dust, which means that you generally don't need to have masks or other special protective gear when you mix from liquids. You can make up only as much working solution as you need for one session. The shelf life of prepared liquid concentrates tends to be better than that of concentrates mixed from powders, but this is not always the case.

 

Powders are less expensive because you aren't paying for water. In these days of shipping restrictions, some retailers won't ship liquids, but powders are less of a problem, and also less expensive since the weigh less than the equivalent chemical in a liquid concentrate. The shelf life of powders is very long - far better than that of liquid concentrates - but the clock starts when they are mixed with water to create concentrates. It is generally not recommended that you attempt to mix anything less that the full package of powder since it is possible that the components may have separated during shipping.