ben_hutcherson

I've never bought No-Doz, but a quick Google search shows 60 ct. bottles. That's 12g of Caffeine in the bottle. For adults, the LD50 of caffeine is roughly 200mg/kg. For someone who weighs 90kg(~200lbs) that amounts to 90 No-Doz pills, or less than two bottles. If you're more on the order of 55kg(~150lbs) that makes less than a full bottle a lethal dose.

Indeed it is. In fact, I oversee an experiment every year where the students quantitate acetylsalicylic acid, acetominophen, and caffeine in a variety of OTC pain killers and other products by HPLC. There are several products(notably Excedrin) that contain all three, but we also use No-Doz as on. Personally, if I want 200mg of caffeine in my body, I'll drink a couple of cups of coffee :) . If I want it for something repeatable, I'd rather buy tablets with a known amount or, probably for me, just grab the bottle of pure caffeine off the shelf. Not everyone has the luxury of the latter, though.

FWIW, I paid $45 for a nice, albeit engraved, F FTN from a major national retailer(KEH) about a week ago. It was a "Bargain' grade item mostly to the engraving(which is actually quite nice-I was expecting an electropenned DL #), but you'll find discussions from buyers on here that KEH "Bargain" items are as nice as many Ebay sellers' "Excellent" or even "Mint." The F2A is worth a fair bit more, but then I also paid $50 for my F2/DP1 from a reputable local shop. Bear in mind that if you're selling to a shop, you're probably going to get-at best-half what they expect to sell it for. You can go the sell it yourself on Ebay route, but you're out about 15% off the top for Ebay and Paypal fees. There's also the fact that you're not likely to get as much selling yourself as you would from a well-established camera dealer. Also, when looking at Ebay listings, be sure you look at Sold listings and not buy it nows that haven't yet sold. As an example, the same shop where I bought my F2/DP1 sold an F2A a few months back. I passed on it, but was offered it for $150(I should have bought it). It sold for $175 on Ebay(this shop lists everything no reserve). Asking prices are not selling prices. Someone above mentioned plain prisms. I've seen nice condition F and F2 plain prisms bring $200 or better without a camera under them.

In the US at least, as I mentioned above, it can be bought OTC as a pharmaceutical stimulant. It's marketed under the name No-Doz in 200mg tablets. The fact that it's a pharmaceutical is significant as it falls under FDA regulation, and not the otherwise unregulated supplement market. I'm not trying to start a debate, but a pill made/sold under FDA guidelines must contain the actual stated amount of active ingredient within the specified margin of error.

No truer words have ever been spoken. EVERY scanner has its own quirks and it takes a lot of practice to get the best out of them. I like Vuescan partially because I have three different brands of scanner in active use and I have a unified interface across all three, but getting the best out of each one is honestly an ongoing learning process for me. The value of the preview function can't be underestimated, esp. a fast low(er) resolution preview. Granted that's all relative since it still take a couple of minutes to preview a 4x5 at 600 dpi. Still, regardless of the size I spend time tweaking each individual frame albeit I consider it even more important than in larger formats since there's a significant time investment in actually making the scan. I have spent 20 minutes getting a 4x5 set up just right before clicking the "scan" button(which takes about an hour when I include infrared cleaning). Even then, I've rescanned negatives/transparencies when the scan didn't match what I see on the light table. I find scanning to be much more of a dark art and black magic than the technical process it should be :) All of that said, though, I find that I ALWAYS get better results with my own scans than with the typical automated lab scans. Lab scans made by a skilled operator on a drum scanner or high end flatbed are a different story-they always do better than I do(both due to their skill and equipment) but then that's an expensive proposition.

I agree with that. Back when I first took an interest in photography, DSLRs were on the market but were out of reach of anyone but pros and rich amateurs. I don't know how many miles of Fuji Superia 400 I ran through my Canon A-1, or really any one of the other 400 ASA print films(Kodak 400UC became a favorite when I discovered it). Much like you said, I considered ASA 400 color print film a general purpose film that would cover me for most situations, esp. with a 50mm 1.4. I'd even load up the occasional roll of Superia 800 or 1600(that was grainy stuff) if I though the situation would mandate it. I keep meaning to buy some Delta 3200-I shot a few rolls of TMAX P3200 back in the day also. Admittedly, these days if I need a fast B&W I'd rather shoot Tri-X and push it. Grudgingly, I now use digital also in situations where I'm going to encounter varying light conditions. Admittedly, my cheap old DSLR starts to look pretty rough at 800. The only 400 speed film I use with any regularity now is Tri-X. As for spending extra for the slower sheet film-the reason I do it is because I prefer the color rendition of Velvia 50. The 100 version is actually(slightly) finer grained but then in 4x5 both are fine enough grained that it won't likely be an issue.

What specific problems are you having, and in what way do the lab scans look "better?" The low contrast look is typical of Portra, although from your scans I'd guess that you're a bit underexposed and dealing with a "thin" negative. I will also say that I scanned a LOT of film on my Canon 2400F(in fact I only retired it late last year) and the 9000F is many generations improved. I was never happy with the results I got with film from the Canon software, but was able to get some very good scans using Vuescan. My memory is a bit hazy since it's been such a long time, but I don't recall the Canon software offering much in the way of settings or customization for scanning. Also, I do notice a few dust spots in your first photo. Dust is a never-ending enemy with scanning. Once again, your 9000F is many times newer than my 2400F, but I now have two scanners with ICE, one of which is contemporary to my 2400F and one of which is newer. ICE refers to both a hardware implementation(infrared scanning channel) and the software algorithms to use that to clean up the scan. I never found FARE to be as good as ICE-the hardware part should be pretty darn similar, but I've thought for a while that Canon made a mistake in going their own way rather than licensing ICE from Kodak. Even with good infrared cleaning, though, you can still expect to spend some time in Photoshop with the spot healing brush.

Then you have nutty people like me who will pay an extra $20 for a box of 20 sheets of 4x5 from Japan to get a film rated at half the speed as what's available on the US market :)

First of all, I'm tempted to ask why you will be pushing Provia to 200. IMO, both of the transparency films on the market already are high enough contrast that they don't push very gracefully. IMO, the last E-6 films that really pushed well were Astia and E100G, both of which are long gone(it will be interesting to see how the new Ektachrome fares). If I required a faster film, I'd use a 400 speed negative film and bump up the contrast in post processing. I've never particularly cared for any 200 ASA or faster transparency film I used. Ektachrome and Kodachrome 200 were just okay, but Ektachrome had terrible grain and Kodachrome 200 was just overall an unpleasant film to me. The best fast transparency film I've used has been Provia 400X. Admittedly I think I only one shot one roll of 35mm, but even in 120 the grain was enough to bother me. All of that out of the way, IMO in a landscape film choice is very situational dependent but I prefer Velvia, esp. Velvia 50, most of the time over Velvia 100. The main transparency film I shoot these days is Velvia 50, and that's in 35mm, 120, and 4x5(ignoring my ancient stock Velvia my freezer, Velvia 50 in 4x5 isn't exactly easy to come by these days in the US). Although I've shot probably miles of Provia, it's a film that honestly just doesn't excite me anymore and I keep very little on hand. Aside from that, I'd agree that the meter in the F100 is probably best suited to any transparency film, although I've shot plenty of transparency film without any meter at all. Still, the Nikon matrix meters, esp. on higher end bodies, are great. And then I'd agree on the FE2 for Tri-X and the N90s for Portra.

Unfortunately, I'm not aware offhand of any such beast for 2x3. If you hunt around, you might find some old hangers for use in a tank, but they don't show up anywhere near as often as 4x5, 5x7, and 8x10 hangers do. BTW, I do 4x5 in the relatively new to the market SP-455 tank. It is all plastic, but has two hangers that hold two sheets each. It's great as it's a daylight tank, only takes 16 oz. of chemistry, and gives good consistent development.

Are you shooting color or B&W? If it's color, I'd STRONGLY advise using one of the native 160 speed portrait films on the market, whether Kodak or Fuji. My experience with pulling color negative film is that it often results in muddy colors and almost unusable low contrast. Either of these films will handle 1/3 or 2/3 stop of overexposure gracefully(normal development) if you need to do so to get larger apertures. If you're shooting B&W, I'd again advise you to use an ASA 100 or 125 film. TMX-100, FP4+, and Delta 100 would all serve you nicely although I'd give FP4+ the nod and Delta 100 as a second choice. I find TMX to be a bit high contrast. You can pull these slightly if you want to knock down contrast, but don't go crazy(I wouldn't go below EI80 or so on FP4+, but this is something you'll want to experiment with yourself before actually doing your photo shoot). I'd be tempted to use Plus-X in that situation, but don't go crawling for outdated film of unknown origin(I think the newest 120 Plus-X would probably be 25 years or better expired now). If you pull a film like Tri-X by two stops, you'll be dealing with uncomfortably short development times and also VERY low contrast. If I had to do it, I'd use a dilute high contrast developer like Rodinal(which should give you reasonable development times also) but I'd still rather just start with a slower film. My experience is that T-grain films work best when shot at an EI somewhere close to box speed.

I think most of us who do color are guilty of stretching our chemistry to the limits just for cost reasons. I don't do C41 myself(I can get it done locally for $4.50 a roll and don't shoot a lot of it) but do E-6. That reminds me that I shot a roll of Ektar in my S2a this past weekend and need to run it by the lab-I have a couple of rolls of C-41 piled up. BTW, I agree that loading the camera is straight forward, but it doesn't change the fact that looping the film over the insert and back is a pain compared to the "straight shot" of TLRs :) . Also, I ran into an interesting problem this weekend where I didn't have the insert fully seated and couldn't figure out why the counter wasn't advancing. I bit the bullet and opened the back, and fortunately the film hadn't advanced any. Just go gentle on winding these-as you've been warned the winding system is the weak point in the system. I'd go so far as to encourage you to resist the temptation to fold out the winding crank and only wind it by the knob.

Fair enough on the chemistry point. One of the things worth mentioning/remembering(and I'm sure most of you who develop know this) is that chemistry "lifetime" or amount required is based on the surface area of the film. 1x135-36, 1x120, 4x4x5 and 1x8x10 are all roughly equivalent in surface area. The E6 kit I use specifies a 4% increase in first developer time for each equivalent processed when using 16 oz., and I think it advises not going past 10 or 12 equivalents before discarding the chemistry. Being able to process two rolls at once, though, is a big deal as even at 40.5ºC you're looking at around 45 minutes total working time with the chemistry(including the washes and so forth). Fortunately, the first developer is the most time/temperature critical step and that's usually when my water bath(aka my bathtub) is closest to temperature. If I don't warm it up, it will be 35ºC by the end of a session. Fortunately, each additional step is done to completion so I just extend the time if I'm concerned about temperature.

I've processed it in a Yankee Clipper tank, although it's been a little while(my 2x3 Crown is mostly a decoration now). As I recall, it was either just a bit too wide or narrow(don't remember which) to fit the 120 setting correctly. On the Yankee reels, you can pretty easily work them to an intermediate setting although don't count on it staying there for an extended period of time(i.e. check every time you load). I don't have as much experience with Patterson reels, but I suspect you could do the same.

Looks great! Kodak and Ilford still use the "lick and stick" system. Fuji has the "easy end seal" where it's a sticker that you pull apart and the wrap it around the film. Also, one of the other nice things about Fuji film is the "Easy Load" spool. Basically, there's a hook molded into the center of the spool and a hole punched into the leader. Once you put the leader through the spindle, you know it's attached and you don't have to wrestle with holding it while you make the first turn to make sure it's going to hold. Before I started doing my own E6, I use to ask for the Fuji spools back when I had them processed, or at least until I had enough of a supply of them to keep me going. Fuji film will, of course, work on any spool and the Quick Load spools work with any film, but it's a nice enough feature that I like having it.

I like my B awfully well, but the Healey 3000 is in a different league. That big straight six(and the exhaust note that comes from it) is to die for. Granted, it IS a car from a different era than the B. The MGC was supposed to be a de-facto replacement for the Big Healey, but the Healey brothers weren't satisfied with it and it just became the MG with 300 extra pounds of engine hanging over the front axle and the terrible handling that came with it. I have to admit, though, that a Healey 3000 that belonged to an uncle's next door neighbor was what made me fall in love with British sports cars in the first place.

One of the things that always surprises me is it seems that plain prisms for the F and F2 sell for more than a nice camera! BTW, here's my F. I do have another one(FTN) on the way.

Unless you are absolutely married to the 6x7 format, I think that probably one of the best modern MF cameras for documentary work is the Fuji GS645. It's a LOT smaller than any 6x7 camera(although as noted either of your camera choices above are smaller than an RB/RZ since these are really 7x7 cameras), and for street/documentary work has the advantage of having 15 exposures per roll vs. 10. In general, I'm not a fan of the 645 format(albeit I do shoot it with my RB67, making probably the worlds largest 645, and have also shot it in the past in a Rollecord), but IMO it's almost ideal for this sort of camera.

Heck, my one Leica doesn't even HAVE a lever :)

There's also the F, and of course if you want to move up the ladder get a Canon F-1 or any FD mount body except the EF. The EF, to my knowledge, was the only one that used lever-out meter-on.

Well, I gave the light a trial run this evening. I quartered a piece of 5x7 paper in the dark, then proceeded with the "penny test." First of all, they're not kidding about this light being BRIGHT. When fully warmed up(~5 minutes) the room was bright enough that I could have shaved by the mirror(granted I rarely shave by a mirror, but the point stands :) ). My first test showed pretty severe fogging in a minute or so. I scratched my head a bit, then started cutting up cardboard. I covered one filter(the one with cracks) completely and then half covered the other one. I didn't test beyond 5 minutes, but I couldn't see any fogging with that arrangement. At least for now, I can't see a print taking longer than that from the time I take it out of the box to the time it's rinsing, so I feel good. Even so, I'm tempted to break down and buy replacement filters while Freestyle still has some. I know that this really is overkill for my darkroom, but at the same time it's great to have such a nice piece of equipment and if I can make it "safe" I'm happy to use it.

Interesting-I might have to look for one of those. I'm always one to paw through boxes of old darkroom stuff when I find it. I've attempted to load two rolls of 120 back-to-back on a Yankee clipper reel, but the result of that was a miserable failure. It's what I get for being cheap-I was trying to economize my 16 oz. of E6 chemistry by processing two rolls at once. As best as I could tell, I wasn't getting proper circulation of chemistry to either roll as I had completely undeveloped patches on both and other places where it was underdeveloped. Plastic doesn't seem to circulate as well as stainless anyway, and I suspect that the rotating design of the Clipper vs. inversion(as on a Patterson) just makes things worse. With Velvia now at $10/roll, I'm reluctant to experiment too much, but I may shoot up some old Ektachrome I have and try developing it back-to-back in stainless(near EOL for a batch of E6 chemistry).

Along those same lines, you can always put a dot of white-out on the rim so that you can transplant the correct orientation from your eye to the camera.

Good point. As a general rule, my go to B&W portrait film is FP4+, and my color portrait film is Portra 160. If they're still too fast, I find that I can pretty safely get good results rating either film at EI 100(standard development), although for FP4+ I've gone lower and pulled. With that said, at typical portrait distances you tend to not get a lot of DOF even around f/8 in 6x7. Unlike with 35mm/Full Frame Digital/APS-C, getting enough DOF for your subject can be more of an issue than having too much. This gets even more true with larger and larger film formats.

As said, set the lens to "A", or the green circle/dot if there's not an A(on most lenses, you will need to push either a chrome or black button to get it to turn there) and be sure your film speed is set correctly on the left dial under the rewind knob. If you go outside on a reasonably sunny day, you can get an idea of whether or not your meter is reading correctly. With ASA 100 film and the shutter speed set to 1/250, the meter(scale on the right side of the viewfinder) should point to somewhere around F8 or F11. If you increase the shutter speed, the aperture needle should drop by one setting("stop") with every click of the wheel while decreasing the shutter speed should cause it to rise. The interplay between these two values is fundamental to understanding photography. Assuming the camera gives values something like I said above, load up another roll, set the ASA dial correctly, and go away. Just be conscience of the needle moving to either extreme and the light illuminating. If that happens, choose a different shutter speed. Also, be aware that with a 50mm lens, photos taken at shutter speeds slower than 1/60 may be blurred if you're hand-holding the camera, and you'll even sometimes have problems below 1/125.