david_freed

<p>I just bought a V-Lux camera and I'm learning how to use it.<br>

I set it to AF-MF, so the zoom ring should becomes a manual focus after I've autofocused.<br>

Looking at the PDF manual, I think I've set this up right, but when I turn the ring, it does not seem to change the focus at all. Also, there is no 'focus highlighting' or focus assist, or a scale which shows me the general focus distance (close to far)--even though I think I've turned on these features as well.<br>

Can anyone give me some pointers as to how I can achieve what I want?<br>

I did by this 'open box' from B&H, which is like-new with warranty, but there could still be something not right.<br>

All the best, David.</p>

<p >I lost my much used Velbon tripod with Manfrotto QR system when I left it on top of my car as I drove away. I now want to replace it. I’m looking at either:<br>

Sirui T-1205X Carbon Fiber Tripod with a Vanguard GH-100 Pistol-Grip Ballhead for about $380 total;<br>

Or a . . . Velbon UT 45L 6-Section Aluminum Tripod w/ PHD-42Q 4-Way Head for about $200.<br>

The Velbon is lighter, only 2.75lbs versus 3.5 lbs for the other, but I’m thinking that the Sirui/Vanguard system will be sturdier, hold more weight if needed, and the max. and min. heights are a bit more. I like the idea of the pistol grip adjustment as well.</p>

<p >Any thoughts on these choices? Best, David.</p>

<p>I'm using this for an alternative photo process that requires a UV light source and vacuum frame (or contact frame) to hold my transparency and plate. My UV light is too intense so I'm using the ND filter gel to give me longer exposure times. With my set-up, spill-over or ambient light is not an issue.<br>

Based on that, I'm still assuming I can place the gel either close to light or to frame.<br>

Best, David</p>

<p >If I have a 1-stop ND gel, does it change the intensity of light hitting my subject if:<br>

a) I place the gel directly in front of the light source, or<br /> b) I instead place the gel right next the subject</p>

<p >My guess is it makes no different in the intensity if (a) the light is filtered first then travels to the subject, or (b) the light travels first to the subject and is then filtered.</p>

<p >Best, David.</p>

<p>I was wondering about the same, since the a few of my lenses are not as snug as I think they should be. I'm not concerned with this affecting the image (the lens is no where near wiggling), but I was wondering if it was possible that dust, moisture and such could be getting in?<br>

Regards, David</p>

<p>Neal, I think you might be right about this.<br>

Thanks, David </p>

<p>I was watching a DVD about Keith Carter. One part shows him in the darkroom working on a print, and he says something like he'd "much rather overshoot it than undershoot it" he "doesn't like creeping up on things." (and that he'd just as soon go past it and move back)<br /><br />I'm not familiar with film photography or darkroom work. Is he talking about something that has to do with shooting the photo, or developing the negative, or to do with making a print? And are there any analogies to digital? <br /><br />David.</p>

<!-- / message -->

RR, yes I think we're more in agreement than not.

At one point in my photo-life, I was taking many workshops each year, trying to soak it all up. I finally burned out on this and found what was offered--including workhops that were to take me to "the next level" or offer a zen "vision" or re-inspiration--uninspiring. Now, I'm down to only one or two classes a year, and this includes printmaking workshop, as I'm learning photo-etching. A workshop with Keith is still on my list however, but it would be combined with a trip to Santa Fe, NM, visiting galleries, museums, the mountains, ruins, eating great New Mexician cooking, etc. which I agree are all equally inspiring, perhaps more so. I'd also offer that sometimes a workshop allows me to get away from the daily grind and focus just on my art for a short period.

Regards, David.

I realize I'm coming a few months late to this discussion, but . . . .

I went to a lecture by Keith last year in Seattle where he mainly talked about what inspires him, not about his

technique. He did, however, mention the Lens Baby, and said something like "it will rock your world" and I

noticed a few die-hard film buffs grimace.

That said, I've tried a tilt-shift lens on my digital SLR, but found it to have very limited movement, compared

to view camera. Right now I work with a Lens Baby (which has it s own look and feel, not to be confused or

exactly compared to view camera movements), and also with a 50mm f1.4 canon prime lens for getting very limited

depth of field. I'm also experimenting with taking a few shots of the same subject with different points being in

focus and combining them in photoshop--we'll see what happens with this approach.

Regarding R. Resnick's comment about attending a workshop with Keith: most of the "self-taught" photographers I

know have taken many workshops, either to learn technique or gain inspiration or both. I hope to take a workshop

with Keith next year (and I'm not rich by any means), not with the idea that I would learn to photograph like

him, but to gain inspiration, maybe some critique of my work, or ideas for new directions I might take my art. I

see nothing wrong with this.

Regards, David

If you look at the web site for Wilhelm Research, you can type in a search for these printers to see if they've don't any testing and how the different papers faired. This will only tell you about the archival quality of the prints, not the quality.

See: http://www.wilhelm-research.com/

Some paper makers also test their papers for how long prints last without fading.

I've been printing for a few years now on my Epson R2400. I understand that the different media settings

(enhanced matte, velvet fine art, ultrasmooth, etc) affect the printing, but I've never seen any details or

specifics about this. Is there any information about this, how the various media settings are different, how do

they print differently, how would you know to select one over another when trying out different paper/media

types, etc.

Best, David

This may have been answered, but . . .

As I understand it, for the R2400 specific media types are associated with either the matte black or photo black ink, and will only show up when that ink cartridge is installed. I almost always the matte black ink, so the glossy and luster medias are not listed, only the ones associated with matte or fine art papers: enhanced matte, velvet fine art, ultrasmooth, etc.

Best, David.

Thanks for the info. I'm not familiar with what a Hartblei Super-Rotator is, but I'll do a bit of research.

I already own a Lensbaby, but consider that it has its own aesthetic (sp?), that's different than the tilt-shift functions on a view camera, but I'll definately play with this some more.

I'm going to rent a Canon TS lens for a weekend before I commit to buying (or saving up to buy one). Do you know anything about the ARAX T-S lenses from Russia? http://www.araxphoto.com/specials/tilt-shift-35/

Best, David

I believe that most people use Canon 35mm tilt-shift lens to get better depth

of field focus or to correct lines for architectural photography.

I'm wondering about using it to increase/create selective focus (a narrower

depth of field in focus), as you can with a view camera?

I'm much inspired by works like those of Keith Carter, and was wondering if a

tilt-shift lens would give me more control of what is and is not in focus in my

images. I'm buying a 50mm f/1.4 with much the same idea in mind.

Any thoughts? Thanks, David.

I was recently told by someone that its fine to use out-of-date ink cartridges

in my Epson R2400, that the dating on the box is mainly for retailers to control

and rotate inventory. I tried this on a few matte black cartridges that were at

most a few months out of date and they worked fine.

For the first time, I'm wanting to try printing with Photo Black ink, instead of

the Matte Black, but the one Photo Black cartridge I have came with the printer,

which is at least a few years old now, so really out of date. Will it still work?

PC, you're right. I meant that there are only a few papers from HP for this printer. I even printed using a matte paper, but I've been told that these will not last long with the dye-based inks used in this printer.

Best, David.

Thanks Steve, yes, I realize that this only takes HP papers which is why I now do most of my printing on an Epson.

But I have a specific need here: to b/w transparencies to use in exposing photopolymer etching plates. I thought I'd dust off the HP and see how it does for this application.

A question: when you said a "test with the #58 only" did you mean that this was the only cartridge you had installed, or that you were only printing with this one out of all three?

Regards, David

I have an HP 7960 that has been sitting idle for a few years now and the

cartridges--though still in the packages--are way out of date.

I'd like to start printing again with this printer, using only b/w mode. I read

somewhere that in this mode, it only uses the no. 59 cartridge and I'm

wondering if this is true?

If it is true that this printer uses only the no. 59 cartridge in BW printing,

than I'll only buy a new one of these, and not all three cartridges.

Best, David

I was asked to create a series of murals to go up on a 16-foot high screen wall

surrounding a construction site. I have created a series of abstract flower

images, and there are now 32 of thess on the wall, all 8 x 12 feet in size.

Yesterday I got an email from someone I met in a photo workshop and whom I told

about this images. She said she went and saw the murals, took some photos, and

is now creating images of her own that she'll frame and put in a show at a local

art walk.

I had an odd reaction to this, feel a bit ripped off really, though I'm not

quite sure why. These are my photos, but they are in the public realm, and I

don't know really what to make of it.

I'm wondering what others think, both as a gut reaction and what legal

implications might be. I mean, I've photographed statues or maybe buildings

which are obvious creations of others, but . . . ?

Thanks, David.

PS - I don't know if I'm answering my own question correctly, but it seems that some online photo stores list the Heico Perma Wash along with 'hypo' products, so I'm now assuming that I can use these others instead (including Kodak hypo clearing agent). Correct me if I'm wrong.

Best, David

I'm new to film photography. A few weeks ago I took a large format workshop. The

steps in film development were:

develop in Kodak HC-110,

water stop bath,

Kodak fixer with hardener, then lights on and

water rinse,

perma wash (which I understand is an archival agent that removes contaminants

from the fix),

water rinse, and dip in Photo Flo.

My main question: we where using Heico brand Perma Wash; I'm wondering what

other products (and brands) are comparable to this, since my local photo store

doesn't carry it. I saw some "hypo" cleaners and I'm wondering if these are the

same?

I'm on a septic system at my home. I've learned that I shouldn't dispose of

photo processing chemicals in my septic, but in a sewer system instead. And that

used fixer can't even be put in sewer without first removing the silver.

What about disposal of Polaroid Type 55 processing. Can I dispose of spent

sodium sulfite mix or water used in washing negatives down my septic, or does

the same cautions apply? And is there any silver that needs to be removed?

Best, David.

Marcelo is correct, though you can also create "halo" and other glowing effects from lighting, and also in your exposure and film development.

Best, David

I'm just starting to learn film photography, using my 4x5 view camera. Last week I took a workshop in this. We exposed Kodak Tri-X sheet film, then developed in HC-110. Unfortunately, in my notes, I noted two different fixers--Kodak Rapid Fix with hardener and Ilford Rapid Fix--but we only used one in the class, so my notes are wrong. To add to the mix, the school where I took the workshop told me they use Ilford Hi-Pan fixer? So I'm also wondering which is best and easiest to use.

David.

thanks all, I think I get it, get it, get it.

best, david