robatsgh

I realize all of that. This is an online sale, of course, so no chance of physical inspection other than the photos provided. It evidences some wear, and the seller's pretty honest about the paces they've put it through, but they're not the original owner.

 

The question isn't age=wear. The question is, he knows (generally) how much wear is shown on the body, but would like to compare that to the age. A certain amount of wear on an older body indicates a much heavier use/abuse when the same amount is seen on a newer one.

 

I've got a Pro-SD setup, and my knowledge of the system doesn't extend back to earlier vintage gear. Since I only have correspondance with the seller (she doesn't know when it was purchased by the original owner, a deceased relative) and photos to judge overall condition, I'm just trying to ballpark it to give my buddy a yay/nay recommendation on the asking price.

Can anyone tell me when Mamiya switched WL finder designs from the old-style

two-step folder to the current single-action finder with the hinged side panels?

 

I'm trying to date an RB67 Pro-S outfit for a friend who's looking to buy one,

with all original accessories, but I don't have access to the serial number on

the body. He wants an idea of how old the kit is (and can gauge the amount of

use) before he makes an offer.

 

Thanks.

The more oblique an angle to the subject, the more surface texture shows. To avoid over-emphasizing skin texture, pay attention to your light placement - more front- than side-lighting.

 

Use softboxes if you have them, place your lights close to the subject to "wash" them with light - the further the distance from the subject to the light, the more point-like and harsh the effect.

Ted - was just about to offer the same advice. Underexposure due to the bright sky and automatic metering, made up for in the printing. The example provided just has that grainy low-contrast look about it.

 

JA - pull the negative itself and look at it. Is it lighter than the majority of the rest of the frames on the same roll? If so, it's likely that the brightness of the overcast sky threw off your metering.

<p>First, what film?</p>

 

<p>Second, why Perceptol? It's not easy to work with, trust me. I wouldn't use it as a "just getting back into it" developer. Why not ID-11/D-76 if you want an inexpensive powder, or Ilfosol-S for an affordable liquid concentrate? DD-X works well as a full-speed developer in a convenient concentrate that gives good grain structure and tonality with most films.</p>

 

<p>Third, why such a dilute developer? Perceptol is a very slow, fine grained developer as it is. I know that Ilford gives times for Perceptol 1+3, but what's your purpose that you can't use a stock or 1+1 dilution?</p>

 

<p>You're also a little off in your figures. According to the Powder Developer fact sheet, the capacity of a litre of Perceptol at stock concentration is four films, or 250ml per 135/36 or 120 roll. To use a 1+1 concentration, you'd need 500ml, and a full liter of 1+3.</p>

 

<blockquote>The table below gives the number of 135/36 or<br />

120 roll films a litre of stock PERCEPTOL, ID-11<br />

and MICROPHEN can process provided that the<br />

developer is reused.<br />

<strong>Stock films/litre</strong><br />

PERCEPTOL 4<br />

ID-11 10<br />

MICROPHEN 10<br /></blockquote>

 

<p>Also, You will lose film speed in Perceptol. Figure a full stop at stock, 2/3 stop at 1+1, and 1/3 stop at 1+3. Meaning if you want normal contrast with a ISO400 film and you're dunking it in stock Perceptol, you should rate the film at about 200, in 1+1 at 250, and 1+3 around 320.</p>

Great - thanks all for the help. I knew that I'd be able to get a straight answer here.

Another question - if I want to mix my own stabilizer/final rinse, can I use PhotoFlo/Ilfotol surfactant combined with some proportion of standard 37% formalin (readily available from aquarium suppliers)? If so, how much formalin per liter is necessary?

Ok - a few follow up questions.

 

Ron - when you say that stabilizer doesn't degrade rapidly, is that in concentrate or working solution form? IOW, can I mix up a liter of stabilizer bath and keep it around for longer than a day or so to reuse?

This is quite possibly a very silly question, but one I'm obliged to ask.

 

I'm transitioning from doing stictly black and white work to including

color slide and negative processes, basically because there are fewer

and fewer people I trust to do the work in a timely, proper, and

affordable fashion. My rollfilm has no digital substitute at this

point, even though I do scan everything after it's processed.

 

The Tetenal C-41 Rapid kit comes with all of 50ml of stabilizer for 5

liters of working solution (1+99). However, using stabilizer or rinse

aid in the tanks (I have a jobo with 25xx tanks and 2502 reels) is bad

mojo. Since the keeping properties of working-solution stabilizer are

so poor, and I'd need such a large amount to fill a tray enough to

submerge 120 stock, I'd basically use all the stabilizer before I got

through half the developer/blix.

 

So, any suggestions for how to properly use the stabilizer bath

off-processor and off-reel? This isn't a problem with E-6, as I'm

using the Kodak chemicals that just use a rinse aid at the end and

move the dye stabilizer to the pre-bleach conditioner, and can mix up

any quantity of photo-flo I need.

 

Thanks, all.

If you want to try something different, Ilfosol-S in 1+14 dilution for 6:00 (20C) gives a very pleasing negative with Pan-F. Ilfosol is a very economical concentrate. If you can get it where you are, I'd recommend it for Pan-F and FP4.

Yeah, that center core helps keep your tank light-tight. Without it, the frames innermost on the film reel are being light-struck.

I have to agree with Andre's response. I've been happy with Pan-F and Ilfosol 1+14. Not as contrasty as DD-X 1+4 while retaining fine grain and good detail. Good tonality, too. Ilfosol's not a good all-purpose developer - it does best with Pan-F and FP4, only so-so with Delta 100, and is far inferior to ID-11/D-76 or DD-X with HP5 or Delta 400.

Pushing Fuji ISO100 film three stops is venturing into ill-mapped territory. There's no dev charts for that space. I'd say only to use a high-speed developer and increase your times from 40-50% per stop. I'll predict even then that there will be next to no shadow detail, little tonality, and lots & lots of contrast. Personally, it's not something I'd do on purpose. Ilford Delta 400 pushed a stop would be my suggestion for an ISO800 film.

Got it. I've been using developers usually described as "full speed" (D-76, ID-11, DD-X, Ilfosol, etc.), and am familiar with the concepts you describe of exposure=shadow, developer/time=highlights, and making necessary adjustments in dilution or agitation to get a full range of detail and tones. From what you're saying basically, "speed enhancing", "speed loss", and such mean the same thing, just moreso. Yes?

Well, then, what is meant by loss of one stop of film speed? I shoot Pan-F at 50, I grab my bottle of stock Perceptol, and I look up on Ilford's dev chart that for Pan-F at rated speed, the recommended time is 14 minutes for stock solution. Will that or will that not give me proper density and contrast?

 

If so, then why bother with the whole "loses one stop" mumbo-jumbo? If not, then why list that as the proper time instead of one that DOES give you correct density and contrast?

 

I'm not trying to be intentionally stupid, but it doesn't seem to make the least bit of sense.

Michael G. - I'm presuming (because I'm rather thick sometimes, and have little experience with Perceptol), that you mean that you shoot the film at the derated speed and develop for the time given for the rated ISO? Ie: expose Pan-F+ at ISO25, and develop using the time for 50?

Not a problem. I load Jobo 2502's with 35mm and 2x 120 rolls in a Photoflex Changing Room - basically a big changing bag with a semi-rigid frame. The biggest pain I've found is removing the tape that holds the end of the film to the backing, and that's only because I prefer peeling it off to cutting it. Also, 120's easier to load in a bag because it doesn't tend to twist as much as 135. The backing peels away from the film separately, so it's never really much of a factor.

<p>BTW - here's a <a href="http://rob.rnovak.net/content/archives/Individual/000520.php">test roll</a> I shot with Pan-F/DD-X:<br/>

http://rob.rnovak.net/content/archives/Individual/000520.php</p>

<p>Pan-F+ tends to be a bit contrasty in DD-X with the stock times (8:00 hand inversion at 20°C). Reduce your developer time to about 7:15 (~10% reduction) if you're hand-inverting. If you're using a rotary processor, start at a 15% reduction (6:45), but be prepared to go to 20% (6:30) if the highlights are still too dense.</p>

 

<p>Another developer to try is Ilfosol-S at 1+14. Doesn't get quite as dense.</p>

Try storing the camera in "B" or "M250". Doing so should shut off any electronics independent of the shutter release meter switch. If your batteries are still draining, then you've got a short somewhere.

The CPE-2 is essentially an agitation motor and temp-controlled water bath, no more and no less. The current CPE-2Plus has one rotation speed - 75 RPM. The older CPE-2's agitate at 50 or 75RPM, though current documentation and most dev charts are based on the higher speed. Honestly, I wouldn't consider a Jobo processor unless also equipped with the Jobo Lift accessory - which makes filling/draining chemicals from the tanks a breeze.

 

Why? Because otherwise, you're required to manually attach/remove the tanks from a magnetized coupling, pop off the rubber seal, and drain/fill the tanks via the light-tight funnel and drain in the lid. The lift lets you keep the tank attached at all times, and you pour in your chemicals through the lift funnel, and drain/recapture via a dump tube. Much easier, much less prone to error, easier to recover chemicals, and much more consistent.

 

I recommend the 2500-series tanks with the rotary processors. A 2521/2523 tank will use 270ml minimum (although I always use 300 to keep the math simple) for either one or two rolls. With that chemical quantity, it costs me forty US cents worth of developer per roll for black & white using Ilford DD-X, and a mere 20 cents with Ilfosol-S. Using everything as one-shot (no reclamation), C-41 costs just shy of $1.70 a roll with Tetenal chemicals, and Kodak 6-bath E-6 is about $1.50 a roll.

<p>I have been using DD-X as my all-purpose developer for everything from Pan-F+ to Delta 400. I've got a bottle of Ilfosol-S sitting on the workbench for some trials with slower films (Pan-F and Fuji Acros), but I haven't tried it yet.</p>

 

<p>Here are some shots from that "magic" combination of HP5+ and DD-X, scanned from neg:<br/>

<a href="http://rob.rnovak.net/content/archives/Individual/000522.php">Enjoying a Hot Dog</a><br/>

<a href="http://rob.rnovak.net/content/archives/Individual/000523.php">Hold Onto This</a><br/>

<a href="http://rob.rnovak.net/content/archives/Individual/000524.php">Eyes on the Prize</a></p>