nickc1

Although Wikipedia does not mention this exact stock all those with a number beginning with '1' are nitrate based and therefore extremely dangerous and inflammable so I suggest taking extreme care until it can be positively identified!!

I have a jobo processor (not in front of me, but a cpa2 as far as I can remember) Last time it was used it took far longer than the hour or so mentioned in the manual to reach temperature and II suspect the element is faulty. I could not locate one so it went into the garage to 'wait' to be repaired. I wantt to have another look and wondered what the opinions are on replacing the existing element with aquarium heaters of a similar wattage - probably 2x200W Any opinions welcomed Thanks

<p>It seems to be dying down a bit now, only 250 or so spam eMails today. However I have sadly had to disable eMail alerts in all forums and I hope that this sorts it out.<br> My problem is that due to firewall/security/safety at work I can only access my personal eMail via a text only eMail client and as this has no junk filtering the 50 or 60 normal messages from all sources I receive during the day are totally eclipsed by the several hundred spam - it is unusable!<br> Using MS Outlook or similar I can easily filter out the rubbish at home so the problem for me is due to the way of working forced upon me by work, not an insolvable one under normal circumstances.<br> </p>

<p>The 850+ messages today came between 02:13 and 15:30 Local time here in the UK (GMT+1)</p>

<p>I am in the same position Larry - 850+ today, 600+ yesterday.</p> <p>Nick</p>

<p>Sorry William/Glen - I don't wish to make any fuss but the 850+ spam messages today have meant that I cannot access any of my eMails via webmail which is what I do during the day but only via an installed eMail client with junk filtering in the evenings.</p> <p>Even then it means that I have to filter out ALL Photo.net messages including the ones that I want to see.</p> <p>Is there no solution?</p> <p>Nick</p>

<p>One area where consumer level scanners can be weak is in the software.</p> <p>Both VuScan and SilverFast are extremely effective scanning softwares, the latter is sometimes supplied in a cut down form with a scanner. If not either will transform your scans (I prefer VuScan but have used both)</p> <p>Nick</p>

<p>Firstly the Paterson orbital tank was originally intended for prints not film.</p> <p>I suspect that these are not flow guides but rather they are intended to push the print under the chemicals where it will stay being comparatively heavy.</p> <p>Using the tank for negatives it may be difficult to keep them from contacting the film - removing some depth will probably not hurt, but may not achieve what you want either. Using the tank for 5x4 films as I do the plastic dividing pegs have a mushroom top which keeps the film below the surface, and any rear coating is not normally affected.</p> <p>Nick</p>

<p>600+ from Aiternative cameras, many time stamped after it is said to be cleared.</p>

<p>Just got a Prakticamat I bought some time ago off the shelf and noticed an odd fault.</p> <p>There is nothing to stop you winding the entire film through by repeatedly operating the wind on lever - it never locks. I had not noticed this before because if you just wind on once, the shutter cocks fine and it fires at all speeds ok - only if you wind on more then once (and who does?) is the fault an issue.</p> <p>Any ideas anyone? - I am not going to rip apart a camera that is basically working to correct an obscure fault if I can help it, but it would be nice to know. If it was a Praktica Nova or a Super TL I would be less worried but taking the top off a 'Mat looks more of an issue with the shutter speed dial positioned around the rewind crank.</p> <p>Thanks for any suggestions,</p> <p>Nick.</p>

<p>Regarding the darkslide - normally the back cannot be removed from the camera without putting a darkslide in and then the darkslide should not come out without attaching the back to a body so no darkslide means a no-no as far as I am concerned! Either someone has been messing or the there is a fault with the back.</p>

<p>Your example picture is a consumer level Nikon DSLR with the maker and model airbrushed out (I was going to say photoshopped out, but calling it that could be an issue!) - the red stripe on Nikon SLRs that has been referred to has been cropped off this image as well.</p> <p>Product placement in fiction is well established - the James Bond books by Ian Fleming are full of such references to cars, toiletries, drinks, cigarettes cars and more, and closer to home - in the book Goldfinger - Bond uses ‘an M3 Leica, an MC exposure meter, a K2 filter’. (Fleming, Ian, Goldfinger. Random House.)</p> <p>Re Hollywood - didn't DeLorean try to sue the filmmakers of Back to the future for using their car?</p> <p>The original DeLorean company went into liquidation in 1982 with cars and parts being sold off to a company with a different name. The current DeLorean company was formed in 1995 so I doubt a film made in 1985 like 'Back to the Future' would have caused any trademark infringement, falling in between these two dates. </p> <p> </p>

<p>Totally agree with Hector regarding only leaving tape on long enough to take a picture.<br> <br /> I only suggested electrical tape as it is smooth and if carefully trimmed to follow the outline of the camera can appear to be invisible unlike gaffer tape which has an obvious texture.</p>

<p>'As I understand, I can't take photos of my own Nikon'</p> <p>This puzzles me as you see lots of books on photography with pictures of cameras on the front. Unless your book could be seen as defamatory (Title: 100 cameras never to buy - for example) it is free advertising for the brand.</p> <p>Some public service broadcasters may not allow 'plugging' a particular brand, but in these cases covering the nameplate is normally sufficient - eg black electrical tape over the prism on a black Nikon. Even so are you planning to advertise your book on TV?</p> <p>If I am wrong please let me know your source of information so I can avoid issues in the future for myself.</p> <p>Nick</p> <p> </p>

<p>30.5mm is a standard size for a filter - could it be that?</p>

<p>Rolleis are amongst the toughest cameras ever produced - good so far, but as a result were the camera of choice for many pros - now not so good!<br> A few years ago I was given a Rolleiflex Automat bought new by the father of a retiring pro in 1947. It was the main camera used for about 25 years, retired and then put back in service so probably had a working life of about 30 years. 30 years times 2 weddings (plus portraits etc) x 3 to 5 films per wedding x 50 odd weeks of the year = about 15000 rolls through it.<br> Yours is newer and could be from an amateur or an even busier pro. Caveat Emptor!</p>

<p>Can confirm 40.5 is available - it is used on FSU cameras such as Zorki and Fed.</p>

<p>It is a very long time since I last did any reversal processing, however what I was recommended to do then was leave the film in its reel (Patterson 4 white plastic) place the reel in a white pot kitchen basin full of water (a pudding basin if you know what I mean) just a bit bigger than the reel and expose for the required time by holding up to the 60W ceiling light bulb or placing an adjustable desk light of similar power close to the surface of the water. After the desired time invert the reel in the bowl repeat the exposure - ie it has now had twice that suggested in the instructions in total, top and bottom.</p> <p>You cannot really give it too much re-exposure as all the remaining silver needs to be exposed - you have already removed all that you don't want. I was told the water was to keep the reel and film cool.</p> <p>That was what worked for me when I last needed it to.</p> <p>Nick</p> <p> </p>

<p>I suspect that pulling- underexposing would not give you the look you require as you would lose contrast as well.</p> <p>What about trying the Harman Direct Positive paper in your camera which will give you that ultra low speed look?</p> <p>Another approach might be to try to investigate paper/developer/toner combinations - sulfide toning might give the brown/black look on a paper only minimally suited to it so as to not give too toned an appearance.</p> <p>As far a the daguerreotype look I suspect you will be out of luck because, as you know, these were produced on a metal plate.</p> <p>Forty years ago you could get metallic photo papers (was it Kentmere made them?) which might get you on the road to producing the look, but these are probably now long gone.</p> <p>Nick</p>

<p>Adding to the above it has to be remembered that the focal length of a lens may differ from the marked value, and while individual examples are unlikely to vary much amongst themselves, only Anthony's suggestion of an optical bench can provide an exact answer.<br> As a result a lens fixed at its nominal FFD may not give acceptable results, even for objects at infinity.</p>

<p>I've just dug out an Exacta fit Meyer Trioplan, f2.8 100mm serial number 3687848 and it certainly has a 15 blade iris diaphragm..<br> I don't think I have ever used it - it came with a batch of other Ihagee stuff and it is a preset lens - my least favourite method of operation.<br> Just out of interest what is the 'soap bubble' bokeh - and does it only apply to the new lenses as has been suggested or also to those like mine?<br> Thanks<br> Nick</p>

<p>Difficult without more info regarding the depth of the body you are envisaging, and whether the lens has to include the shutter or not, however one option might be a collapsible lens like an Elmar or Industar<br> If a shutter is needed then the entire lens/shutter assembly from a bellows retina or retinette may be an option, as might the lens assembly from an Argus Model A.<br> Nick</p>

<p>Regarding the new prices of Leica lenses I have often tried to calculate today's estimated cost for vintage gear, but without any real success.</p> <p>Talking to a colleague who teaches business he pointed out that the skills required for any kind of manufacturing are harder to find in employees today and that some engineering workers, described as semi-skilled in the past, are now classed as skilled artisans and paid accordingly.</p> <p>He intimated that changes in society, in manufacturing processes and in the number and availability of skilled hand craftsmen have made such comparisons unreliable to say the least. </p> <p>Nick</p>

<p>How long is it until your trip? - because you have a known camera now but will you have time to buy another outfit check it out under different conditions (hot cold etc) and get a number of results back to really trust the new purchase?</p> <p>All of the suggestions made have advantages and drawbacks - but buying a new outfit that then fails on day 1 is your worst nightmare.</p> <p>Having said that my suggestion, should you wish to change anyway, is that I use a Hasselblad 500C on a neck strap as a walk around camera and it works OK for me, but I have never seen another on a strap round someone's neck. The rumour mill suggests the 'blad needs regular servicing if you are a Pro, but as an amateur I have never used it intensively enough to find out if this is true or not. </p> <p>Nick</p>

<p>Digital is the obvious and easy choice in todays world, however I would like to suggest some reasons to consider a film TLR.</p> <p>I totally agree with the comments regarding the waist level finder as it seems to be the act of holding a camera up to the eye that makes the photographer noticeable and triggers the 'you can't take pictures here' response.</p> <p>Despite this I wonder if the C330 is quite the solution you are looking for. Apart from the age question mentioned above, they are quite hefty brutes and may be no easier to use without a tripod - my limited personal experience with these is that they are not hand holding cameras.</p> <p>My suggestion is a twin lens reflex of the Rollei / Yashica size on a carefully adjusted neck strap so that the strap takes the weight and you need to hold the camera steady. These are all quiet in use which cannot always be said about a camera with a focal plane shutter, and even more so a SLR. </p> <p>You will need to find one that has not had a hard professional life, but equally if you can find a professional quality camera that has been in amateur hands it may be barely run in today.</p> <p>Obviously they are quite old, and you would need to take care regarding condition and repairability - but you may wish to send it for a CLA anyway. You would also need to consider if film and processing is available convenient to you.</p> <p> </p>