brad_isaacs

<p>thanks. i wasn't the official photographer for either occassion so it's not a huge deal to anyone else but me, but this is the only film/developer combo i use, and i'd even been shooting with that camera at 1600 not long before and the films came out great. that's why this is all so weird. i'm really upset about it.<br>

the markings on the film look normal. MUCH darker than my images.<br>

brad</p>

<p>thanks, that's what i was thinking too. ridiculous timing though. my brother's wedding and a friend's wedding. no pictures.<br>

brad</p>

<p>hi,</p>

<p>i just developed 7 rolls of tri-x 400 that i exposed at iso 1600. they were shot indoors with dim lighting and some outside with heavily overcast late afternoon skies. i was shooting on automatic but could hear the slow shutter speeds as i shot. i developed in d-76 1:1 for 13.25 minutes. they came out almost blank. some frames have enough of one object or part of a face so i can tell what it is, but there's almost nothing there. even the exterior shots are very very faint. they were done using two separate batches of developer that i mixed the night before processing the film.<br>

wtf happened?!</p>

<p>brad</p>

<p>thanks very much. the clip test is a good idea. if i can justify the risk of destroying something important i may do that. but i'm glad to hear that doing them at 800 should provide usable results. am i correct in thinking that the 1600 roll, having been in shot in very low light, would come out underdeveloped and extremely low contrast?<br>

i don't know what stand development means. like i said, the 1600 roll was shot in very low light though. i don't know how that plays into it.<br>

i've never used diafine, but i've heard people talk about it. am i wrong in thinking it would still lead to under or overdeveloped film?</p>

<p>hi,</p>

<p>i have a few rolls of tri-x 400 that i shot recently but i'm unsure what speed each of them was shot at. i was shooting iso 400 with one camera and 1600 with another and because i was in a rush the exposed rolls all got mixed up together...sloppy, i know. i was intending to just take them one at a time and guess, but it occured to me that i could just develop them all at iso 800. though it would guarantee they're all done wrong, maybe they would be more salvagable? any advice? will they be too difficult to work with that way?</p>

<p>any help would be much appreciated.</p>

<p>brad</p>

Hi,

The bottom shutter release broke on my M645. It's the one with for using a cable. I'd been shooting with it all

day and when i went to fire the shutter it just flew off the camera at the end of the cable. I can get to go back

in and even fire the shutter by pushing it, but it won't stay in and can't support the cable. Has anyone ever had

this happen?

My question is should i bother getting this repaired? Do you think the repair will cost more than a new body?

Thanks very much.

Brad

thanks rob,

yeah i checked around for times...got concerned when i couldn't find anything, even on this forum, about 320 exposed at 400...and you're right, it isn't much of an error. a test roll is a good idea. as for the contrast i think i've got a few films that will be rather flat, and a few that will be contrasty...but i can probably just shoot something and compensate for the difference after seeing the results...your numbers sound like a good place to start.

thanks for the advice...

Brad

hello,

i accidentally shot some tri-x 320 @ asa 400 and am wondering about development

times...i'm a little fuzzy on the math for figuring it out and these films are

sort of important so i don't want to risk screwing them up. i'm intending to use

either d76 or microphen, though feel free to suggest something else that might

yield smooth, fine grain negs.

thanks

Brad

thanks vick,

so could i just keep the bag bellows on all the time? for all combinations of lens and back?

brad

hi everyone,

i have a few more 8x10 questions if you don't mind...

first of all, if i have an 8x10 camera with a wide angle, something

like a super symmar XL, and then put on a 4x5 reduction back and a

90mm something or other, do i also have to change the bellows?

also, when using the reduction back, can i still use that 150mm with

the larger image circle? do i need to compensate for it?

thanks for helping out...i know stuff like this has probably come up

before but searching the archives isn't always as easy as it sounds...

thanks

brad

thanks everyone...

i agree that starting out on 8x10 isn't that greatest idea which is why i think i need that reducing back...i'm not as interested in 4x5 but it is a hell of a lot cheaper, and it seems pointless to buy a 4x5 camera to learn large format and then get an 8x10 camera when i can get both at the same time...even if i only use the reducing back for awhile and wait until i'm realy ready for the expensive of 8x10 film and probably a new lens...

at any rate thanks for the feedback, i'm glad to know if i get this thing i can expect a lot from it...

noah, may i ask what kind of camera you have? it sounds like you do some field work with it...

thanks

brad

Hi,

I'm thinking of getting into large format and have found a toyo g 8x10

with a 4x5 reduction back for a reasonable price. however, i'm really

new to all this and as much reading as i've done on the subject hasn't

equipped me to judge which models are best. i'm not really concerned

with how heavy it is...i guess really i'm asking if there's anything

particularly good or bad about these cameras..

thanks very much..

Brad

daunting to say the least is right...to build on PC's analogy, this feels a little like heading out to read every newspaper in every language in the world and trying to decide who the best editorial columnist is.

thanks again..

Brad

thanks everyone...i've learned a lot reading your posts...not the least of which is that discussions about this type of thing have an awful lot of x's and 0's in them...

anyway i appreciate it...i think i'll stick with tmax for awhile and maybe try some d-76 and microphen to start and see what happens...i have a feeling getting through all this could take awhile...

i'll pick up the darkroom cookbook for sure. thanks again...

Hi,

I've been shooting tmax 100 for awhile, developing in tmax

developer...i've been happy with it but am thinking about what else it

can do, or just trying other films...i'm often reading peoples remarks

that go something like "this film looks great in microphen," or "tmax

looks great in rodinal"..."try pan-f+ in D76"...my question is simply,

what does this mean? how do the different developers affect the film?

is it just contrast? richness of tone? subtlety of detail? i'm just

having trouble picturing what a film "looking great" looks like...if

someone could help me understand i'd appreciate it..

thanks

brad

Has anyone heard of cokin optilight filters? i've seen them for sale

on ebay but cannot for the life of me find any information on

them...they're so cheap i would have to assume their garbage, but am

wondering anyway...

thanks

Brad