Monophoto

Ah - in the good old days, you would just pull out the Spiratone catalog - - -

 

What you are looking for is likely to be as scarce as unicorns. But the one place that MAY have something is the Tiffen Company. Their catalog used to list all kinds of adaptors, but dealers rarely carried the odd things so you had to order directly from the company.

 

The other possibility is the approach that I took at one point - find a threaded adaptor that is about the same diameter as the Series VI ring, and glue it in place using some two-component epoxy. Crude but effective.

I've never heard of this exact process, but it appears to be another variant of compensating development.

 

Ansel Adams wrote extensively about waterbath development as a means of controlling contrast. In that approach, film soaks in developer, and then is transferred to a plain water bath where development continues until the developer saturating the emulsion reaches exhaustion. Since development will be more agressive in the highlights, the developer in those areas will exhaust first, while developer in shadows will continue.

 

Another version of this is the now-popular stand development or minimal-agitation development techniques. These use extremely dilute developers, and after a brief period of agitation, the film is allowed to stagnate. Once again, the idea is that the developer in the highlights will exhaust first, and because there is no agitation, will not be replaced with fresh developer.

 

These are all techniques to manage extreme contrast, and they really work.

It certainly looks like T-Max.

 

I suggest doing a clip test. In total darkness, cut a foot or so from the end of the roll, load it onto a reel and process it. Don't worry about getting the development time perfect - the objective is to be able to see the edge printing that will identify the film.

Probably Hong Kong and Shanghai.

 

(Sorry - couldn't resist.)

 

In Shanghai, a nice vantage point is the old market building on the Bund next to the river. You have a nice view of the modern highrises in Pudong, and if you turn around, into the old part of the city. Or you can go to the observation platform at the top of the Pearl of the Orient Tower in Pudong.

 

In Hong Kong, the Sheraton Hotel provides a nice view of the highrises across the river.

No.

 

A 60Hz motor rotates at (approximately) 5/6 rated speed when operated at 50Hz. Therefore, if the motor is driving a clock, it will take approximately 10% longer for the hand to make a full revolution than at its rated frequency.

 

The only possible way to "recalibrate" the timer would be to either rewind the motor or redesign the face to reflect the slower rotational speed. Neither is a practical solution.

 

Are you using your timers to control an enlarger or to time chemical processing? In either case, rather than recalibrating your timer, the simple solution is to recalibrate your process. That is, don't worry about how long the timer actually takes for the hand to make a revolution, but instead work out new times for either your enlargements or your chemical processes that take into account the slower speed of the timer.

 

Frankly, I would almost expect that to be almost automatic. In the case of enlarging, you really don't care what the timer setting is other than as a reference point for the next time you make a print from that negative. Likewise, for processing, you simply extend your 'nominal' processing time about 10% (as measured by the timer, NOT by an accurate timepiece).

I don't know Arthur Morris, but it sounds like he was schlepping a bunch of equipment.

 

There are two things that we could speculate about. One is that the equipment was all new, which would have caused the customs inspector to wonder if it had been purchased while Mr. Morris was out of the US.

 

The other is that Mr. Morris unwisely opted to vociferously challenge the customs inspector.

One other point - confiscation. Normally, if you acquire something while traveling overseas, the only thing you have to worry about is declaring it at customs, and if necessary, paying the required duty. The best way to address that is to be honest when you fill out the customs declaration.

 

But, there are situations where Customs can confiscate items purchased overseas. Drugs for obvious reason. Also some foods and any form of living plant or animal. That has to do with protecting the US environment.

 

But in rare instances in the past, Customs would also confiscate items being brought in from outside the US in violation of an agreement giving a US company exclusive rights to import that item. I don't think this is done any more, both because Customs has more important things to do and also because those restrictive arrangements are no longer acceptable.

This is not new - prior to retiring, I traveled extensively on business and carried a camera everywhere I went. I have a registration certificate for the camera date 1978. However, I have to say that in literally hundreds of trips, I was never challenged to produce that certificate a single time.

 

And today, I would be very surprised to see that as an issue. Back "in the day", the function of the customs inspection was mainly to identify items acquired outside the US for the purpose of requiring the traveler to pay the appropriate duty tax. Today, the inspectors have much more to worry about - terrorists, drugs, the legitimacy of travel documents, etc.

 

I would also point out that in those hundreds of times that I entered the US following an overseas trip, I was never actually required to undergo a physical "inspection" in which the inspector went through my luggage. I saw it happen to many other people. One thing that I noticed was that travelers with lots of expensive-looking luggage and shopping bags seemed to be inspected much more closely than people who gave the appearance of being serious business travelers - one suitcase and briefcase or computer case,.

David Vestal once said that the fact that the print was hard to make does not mean that it was a good print.

Gerald is right on - Kodak measures our wants and our interests in the only way that counts - in the dollars we spend on their products.

 

If we don't buy it, they ain't gonna make it any more. It's that simple.

Pop Photo was an excellent magazine until the day the owners fired the editorial staff, and replaced them with the editorial staff that had just driven Modern Photo into the ground. That's when I cancelled my subscription, and I haven't so much as browsed through a copy at my dentist's office since.

Let me suggest an exercise that will help you understand the impact of lens focal length.

 

I assume that you are working in 35mm. Take a piece of cardboard. Cut a rectangular hole in the center of the cardboard that is 1 inch by 1.5 inches.

 

Pick some standard lens focal lengths. For the sake of illustration, I suggest 28mm and 100mm. Since you will need to have those dimensions readily available, draw a couple of lines on your cardboard - make one 28mm long, and the other 100mm long.

 

Now, you need a subject. Any subject will do, and you may want to experiment with various subjects. Hold the cardboard up to your face, looking through the hole at your subject. Use only one eye, and with the cardboard held 28mm away from that eye. Notice how much of your subject you can see through the hole without moving your head or the cardboard. Then, move the cardboard so that it is 100mm from your eye, and again notice what you can see without moving anything. What this shows you is the relative difference in the field of view of a 28mm lens and a 100mm lens, and you will find that 28mm lens gives you a much wider field of view.

 

Now, repeat the process, but this time, walk back and forth until you can fill the image frame (the hole in the cardboard) with the subject you are interested in with the cardboard 28mm from your eye. Then, move the cardboard to the position 100mm from your eye, and then back up to the point where the frame is filled to about the same degree. What you will find is that with the cardboard in the 100mm position, you need to be much further away from the subject to fill the frame to the same degree that you do with the cardboard in the 28mm position. The point here is that the lens with a longer focal length allows you to be much further from your subject to fill the frame to the same degree that you can with a shorter focal length lens.

 

Next, repeat the last set of observations, but this time concentrate on the relative position of the elements of your subject - foreground versus background. The first few times you do this the differences might be harder to see, and it might be helpful to use the old painter's trick of scaling the height of a subject element against the length of a pen or pencil - do that for both foreground and background elements. You should find that with the cardboard in the 28mm position and with the subject filling the frame, the foreground elements appear larger compared with the background elements than they will in the 100mm position but with the same subject filling the frame. This shows you the difference in perspective that you get as you change the focal length of your lens.

 

Finally, repeat this last test using a person as your subject, with the subject's head and shoulders framed as your image. Frame the subject head on - not at an angle. Note in particular the shape of the subject's nose - you should find that in the 28mm position, the subject's nose will look much larger than in the 100mm position. This illustrates why portrait photographers want to use slightly longer focal length lenses so as to avoid abnormal exaggeration of noses, ears, elbows and other anatomical parts.

Carmel - for Point Lobos, the Mission, and the galleries.

Monterrey - interesting stop en route to Carmel

 

You will definitely need a rental to get to Carmel from San Francisco. Route 1 is the scenic and less crazy route - the last I heard, it was blocked just south of Pacifica, so you might have to take the 280 to Halfmoon Bay, and then jog over to Rt. 1. Avoid 101 unless you are suicidal.

 

A rental is also needed to get to Marin Headlands and Muir Woods. But for things in the city, public transportation is probably a better choice.

 

Stores: Calumet and Glasser are OK - they are stores. Camera West in Monterrey is more of an experience. Another good spot is Keeble and Shuchat in Palo Alto.

Laws and customs vary from one country to the next. You need to find out what is appropriate where you live. Here in the US, the rules that govern where people can hunt may also provide guidance to where (and under what circumstances) you can gain access for photography. A suggestion might be to ask at a shop that sells hiking and/or hunting gear.

 

Our town has wide sidewalks and is famous for "strolling". The sidewalks remain sidewalks, but the local municipality grants many restaurants the right to set up seating on the sidewalk in front of their restaurant for the summer, and most of the restaurants have some kind of fence to prevent pedestrians from walking through the seating area.

 

Several years ago I was photographing in town early on a Sunday morning - well before any of the restaurants were open. I had stepped into one of the fenced seating areas to compose an image when the restaurant owner challenged me for trespassing on "his" property.

 

Now the frustrating aspect of this is that the point I had chosen for my photograph was very close to the tripod holes left by Walker Evans when he did one of his famous Saratoga Springs street scene images back in the 1930's. It somehow seems inappropriate that someone consider that sidewalk to be "private property". And frankly, the restaurant owner is a jerk, and I have never eaten in his restaurant.

Peter -

 

Here's a description of mine: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=13638&highlight=slosher

 

and in this posting there is a picture: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=18584&highlight=slosher

Always use the quantity of chemical recommended by the tank manufacturer, even if you are processing only one roll in a two roll tank, or partial rolls.

 

There are two reasons for this:

 

1. Using less than the recommended amount of developer changes the way the liquid sloshes around when the tank is agitated. Changing agitation will cause a change in the contrast of the processed film.

 

2. If you are using a standard inversion tank, you want the film to be complete submersed between agitation cycles. If you use less than the recommended amount of chemical, the film may be only partially submersed. The result will be uneven development.

 

You also need to make sure that you have at least the minimum amount of the active developer ingredients required to process the film. That's a potential problem if you are using a process that allows you to economize on developer - extreme dilution, or continuous agitation in a rotary tank, for example. Fortunately, that's not going to be a problem if you are processing partial rolls.

"I think you will get the most out of large format if you process your own film. Either trays, Nikor tank, HP Combi-Plan tank, Jobo tank, BTZS tubes, or the Unicolor print roller method. You'll also save a lot of money doing your own processing."

 

Let's not forget the slosher.

Adam -

 

As you move up in format, grain generally becomes less important. As a result, it is possible to use faster film and achieve the same "quality" that you are calibrated on in MF. Also, faster film generally will manage contrast better than slower film. And one of the advantages of LF is the ability to develop individual sheets - which gives you even greater control over contrast. On the other hand, many LF photographers tinker with exotic developers and semi-stand processing to maximize local contrast and sharpness, and choose to use slower speed film in their quest for resolution.

 

Your choices in LF film are limited - Kodak, Ilford, Efke, Foma and perhaps Fuji if you want to deal with quick loads. Kodak and Ilford both make both T-grain and conventional film, while Efke and Foma are both traditional. Kodak and Ilford will be more expensive. Efke has a reputation for being easily scratched, but if you are careful in processing, that is irrelevant.

 

From that point on, you are on your own. It's much like the boxers versus briefs situation - it's a personal choice and what works for me won't necessarily work for you.

I tend to agree with Eric - Belmont (the cross street nearest the theater) is not within walking distance of the loop area (unless you are really into hiking). I'm sure that there are hotels in the area of the theater, but you won't be convenient to anything other than the theater. So it makes more sense to stay in the Loop and take a taxi.

 

Wife and I stayed at the SuissHotel a couple of months ago. Very nice place, great location, and someone else was paying. Have also stayed at the Hyatt Regency (next door to the SuissHotel on East Wacker) and at the Palmer House. The Palmer House is very old and elegant - although the guest rooms are a bit dated.

San Francisco - for photography, for wine and for food.

A good place to start for galleries in New York is http://www.photography-guide.com/.

 

Options are somewhatly more limited in Boston. There are a couple of commercial galleries on Newbury Street, and several of the museums sometimes show photography. There are galleries at Harvard and MIT that are also worth visiting. One of the best options in Boston is to take a ride up to Cape Ann and stroll around Rockport. Another options is to drive down to Cape Cod - there are a few galleries in Provincetown that specialize in photography, and several others that include photography along with other forms of art.

Willem -

 

The only new 4x5 tank that I've seen in many years is the HP CombiPlan tank. I'm not familiar with the suppliers in Montreal, but I suspect you could order an HP tank from either B&H or Adorama in New York.

 

As to used equipment, your best bet is likely to be e-Bay.

 

But more fundamentally, a question you need to address is whether a tank is the right solution for you. There are several approaches other than a daylight tank. Obviously, a Jobo processor is one to consider (and probably the most expensive), but other solutions include using a print processing tank (such as the Unicolor tank), open trays, or a slosher.

 

My personal preference is for a slosher. You can purchase commercial sloshers from a variety of supliers (B&H, Adorama, Photographers's Formulary, etc), or you can make one from materials purchased at Home Depot.

HP is correct - it's not really an issue. But if you are still concerned, put your used fixer in a plastic milk jug, drop in a few small pieces of steel wool, shake and let it sit for a few days. The silver will precipitate out as a sludge, and the liquid can then be dumped with no problem.

 

Developer, stop and hypoclear can be dumped down the drain with no problem.

Kodak gel filters are made of gelatin. Unfortunately, that makes them very sensitive to fingerprints and other physical damage. Always save the original foil envelope for storage.

 

Cokin square filters are a plastic resin material. They tend to be far more rugged than Kodak gels, but they can be scratched. The original plastic boxes are fine, but they occupy space and add weight to the bag - I keep mine in one of those CD cases with plastic/tyvek sleeves.

 

A common concern with Cokin and some other resin filters is that the colors are not always true. They work fine for monochrome work, and if you are trying to achieve a dramatic color change. But if you are trying for exact color reproduction, you may be disappointed to find that they introduce subtle color shifts.

If I understand correctly, the choice is between a simple credit line ("photo by") or a copyright notice ("photo copyright XXXX 2007").

 

A copyright notice says that you own the image, whereas the credit line merely identifies who the photographer was. If the image is published with a credit line only, I would think that the law would presume that the image is covered by the copyright on the publication, and the photographer no longer owns it. Therefore, a copyright notice provides the photographer the right to subsequent use (or sale) of the image.