xbow

<p>Thanks for the input folks...I am working a solution now so hopefully I will be back in business with my beloved KMV soon!</p>

<p>Folks,<br>

I have a voigtlander Dynar (12 inch) that is mounted in a compound shutter...the shutter is not running very well, mostly inaccurate shutter speeds and even the inaccuracies seem to drift a bit. Unfortunately its my only shutter/lens for my beloved Kodak Master View 8x10...<br>

Anyone interested in an Ikoflex Ic with a working light meter? I would be willing to trade it for getting my shutter back up to speed or a suitable replacement.....<br>

I posted an ad in classifieds for the camera at 125....but I rather trade it for replacing repairing the shutter...</p>

<p>John</p>

<p>James,<br>

Thanks for your comments....and believe me, nothing is too basic!</p>

<p>David,<br>

Yes, I noticed that too. As I look over the picture and the negative I see things like this and endevour to understand. The darks bands my be my poor selection of levels in post processing the scanned negative. Thats my first theory. My second may be either uneven development or a light leak, and I will take a hard look at the negative to see if either (or both) is the case. Anyway, I imagine all this is part of the technique improvement process!<br>

Thanks!</p>

<p>All, looking for your comments and suggestions. Below is my first shots with my Kodak Master 8x10. The shot is a skyline of Vancouver, BC. The Tmax 100 was developed (N) in Xtol at 1:1. The lens was a Voigtlander Dynar 12 inch (f/6).<br>

Specifically I am looking for comments on how to improve tonality, or any other general suggestions you might have. <br>

For the record, looking at my first large format negative- with a quasi-decent image- was quiet satisfying....I think I am hooked big time. It is difficult to describe the feeling when I pulled the negative out of the rotary processing tube.....</p>

<p>Thanks in advance<br>

John</p><div></div>

<p>Anyone know who might have a densitometer in the So. FLA area? I have run through all the places I can think of. I know one can pick one up on the bay for pretty cheap, but I would like to avoid buying on just for a finite number of film tests.<br>

Thanks!<br>

John</p>

<p>Thanks to all for their comments. Paul G- too late, the window for feeling any guilt has closed! I have the camera all cleaned up. Next up will be some film density and speed testing, then some development characterization. Once all that is done I will start shooting with it. I will certainly post the results of that.....Thanks again to all!</p>

<p>John </p>

<p>Robert,<br>

Thanks, those numbers were what I had sort of pre-calculated myself, or at least very close. Here is a picture of the Dynar in its lens board. The lens is much clearer that the photo would suggest.....</p><div></div>

<p>Lynn,<br>

Thanks for the history. As for age, I am not so far behind you. The unit seems built like a tank, and yes it is a bit heavy. The extra lens boards I immediately recognized as a "deal enhancer" as I had been reading about the Kodak Master View for quite awhile and had seen discussion regarding the rarity of the boards. So is there a model of view camera at Calumet now that is a direct decendant of the Master View?<br>

Thanks<br>

John</p>

<p>Michael, Urs- Thanks for the encouragement. Unfortunately, no sister though...<br>

BTW- As I was clearing the film holders I got with the camera, I discovered 4 sheets of film still in the holders. I fortunately put the holders in my changing tent to check for film, so no damage done. I wrote to Gene M. to see if he can take a shot at them. Likely they are just unexposed film left in the holders, but its worth it to find out I think.<br>

I will let you know....<br>

BTW the Dynar appears to be from the 1933-34 timeframe, and is uncoated.</p>

<p>Thanks again</p>

<p>John</p>

<p>Thanks for the encouragement....the grass is green, the sun rises in the east, and my wife wont forget either. Just some of the certainties in life! That having been said, she is as enthusiastic about a beautiful contact print as I am- I think I will be OK!<br>

I am really anxious to get started!<br>

Bruce- I dont feel guilty at all...just wanted an excuse to tell everyone my good news!</p>

<p>After years of working medium format, digital, etc. I finally succumbed to the lure of large format....<br>

I just got my hands on a Kodak Master 8X10- in great shape. The question is, how guilty should I feel

about the price I paid......<br>

The body is in great shape; bellows look new. It came with a Voigtlander Dynar 12 inch lens, mounted

with a B&L compound shutter. Glass is remarkably clear! I also got 4 or 5 lens boards, 7 Fideltiy

film holders, the case and a Bogen head on a zone VI tripod...I paid 1K...painful but it struck me as worth the

price.<br>

It will be a while before I get it cleaned up and start shooting, but for right now I find myself dumb-struck by the

image on the ground glass....its absolutely beautiful.<br>

Just wanted to say hello to the forum, and thanks for all the great information and reading over the years......</p>

<p>John</p>

<p>I own a DIII that is smack right in the middle of the serial numbers that need the AF fix. I have never had any (zero, notta) issues with AF.</p>

I agree, this is a far longer absence than I have ever seen. He's probably just out on a huge vacation to some exotic spot (like the Quabbin Reservoir or old state school) and will probably inundate us all with some amazing pictures when he gets back!

Alec- Thanks for the correction....now I can sleep tonight! I guess I have revolver on the brain. I looked around on the Graflex.org website and didnt find anything. Its a bit of a mess as websites go, so I have little doubt that I could have missed it. Thanks for the name. I will see if I can get in touch with him.

 

Thanks again.

Does anyone know of a person or shop that can do a CLA on a Baby Peacemaker

Speed Graphic?

 

Thanks in advance....

So has anyone sent the camera/lens comibination to Canon for adjustment? How long will I be (gulp) without my gear?

Crap.... Now I am thinking my 24-70L is soft too.....but I am outside the exchange period....

Rosie, I fear the worst. First, let me say that I am sure your daughter didn't mean it! Second, a shock induced failure generally doesnt break something that is easy to fix. Your problem could range from something physical broken in the camera (lever, cog, etc), to damage to the processor. The later is more likely. I think that you will probably wind up shipping the camera to a place that has good service and can fix it. Coming to the decision to bite the bullet and ship is, I believe, step 11 in the 12 step process of recovery. You are probably past anger, shock, and disbelief, but still are in denial! LOL!

 

Good Luck!

 

John

Van!

 

Very good news! I am glad that my experience with them did not occur with you. Its nice to hear that something in the customer service works from time to time these days. Congrats!

I ran into this before....You will not have "placed" your order until this morning, when they come in. Then they will tell you that it takes 24 hours to process your order, because they have to verify your payment (instant verification everwhere else in the business world these days), even though you can check your bank account and see that the money for the order is already out of it! So your order will probably ship Tuesday, or even Wednesday if you are unlucky.

 

I hope I am wrong...and by all means let us know how this exactly worked out for you!

One word...Gene M.....er, well...a word and a half

Plus.....my Mark III is in the serial numbers that supposedly contain the problem, and my AI SERVO performance has been flawless. I do intend to send mine in sooner or later to get the upgrade (fix), but I find it hard to let it go for a couple weeks when its working just fine!

 

Make the splash...you will be thrilled with the camera!

Check with Gene M....he hangs around the classic camera forum. He is the expert on processing old and expired film.

Add grain if you want the final image to look grainy. Shoot BW film if that is the best medium for getting the final image that you have in your head. Its not wrong to add grain, its not wrong to shoot BW when the world is in color. The only thing that is wrong is when you get a final print (or image) that is not what you had in mind. Once again- visualize your shot, then turn it into reality in any way you can.

 

If all you are looking to do is to capture the world exactly as it exists, you're a picture taker. Just like typing words into a message post doesnt make you a writer, being a picture taker doesnt necessarily make you a photographer. When you work on getting your view or impression of the subject into a print or image, you are a being photographer in the artistic sense. That feeling, impression, or view of a subject that you want to have in the final image is unique to you, and represents the artist part in you.

 

All this is my opinion, clearly. I dont mean to offend our argue, its just my take on this kind of subject. For what its worth I have yet to achieve the very thing I am talking about- Interpretation or visualization of the subject in my mind being exactly represented by the final image I produce. But I try.