ben heaven

<p>I have very little photography experience and am new to developing film, however I used ID11 as a stock solution and developed 8 rolls of 120 in it of different speeds before I disgarded it. It worked fine for me following the instructions but as I said I am not greatly experienced. Perhaps to others the quality decreased but I could not detect any change. I shoudl also point out that I scan the results so perhaps small changes would be hidden in that process. hope that helps.</p>

<p>Sorry to chip in again, but that's a wonderful shot Bruce. I love the colours and 'earthy' tones you've captured here. As for the composition I think it's either very clever, or very lucky the way you have captured the out of focus womans' face in the top corner. Leads my eye strongly to the girls' face (not to mention your choice of focus). Wonderful work as always. If you don't mind me asking, how did you find using the 645 format contax vs the 67?</p>

<p>... ok sorry ignore that last question. i just checked your blog.</p>

<p>Hi Bruce,<br /><br />Several of the experiences you describe when shooting film are becoming familiar to me. for example you said that; "With film, when I shoot, as soon as I've taken an image, I'm onto searching for the next one". This is exactly what i have been enjoying too.<br /><br />Reflecting on what you and others have written, the 'workflow' differences between using film and digital media extend back beyond the darkroom/computer station and into the field. I think that the experience of taking photographs is a facinating topic in and of itself, and one that you address eloquently on your website and through your podcasts. Thanks again for this thread.<br /><br />I should also note that I plan/hope to write an article about my personal experience of moving from digital to film (as a comparitivly inexperienced 'new' photographer). so if i am lucky enough to have it published I'll let you know. I think that there are actually quite a few people out there like Steve and me who are interested in film having never touched the stuff, but then i suppose that has not been your experience running your course.</p>

<p>Hi Bruce,<br />I'm really pleased this thread is still active. My experience is very similar to that of Steves; I had until last year used only digital cameras and had no experience of film at all. However the more I read, and the more I looked at the work of photographers in a range of subject areas, the more intrigued I became about the merits of using traditional, 'classic' medium format cameras. I was particularily interested in the workflow of using film cameras in the field, and the asthetic and technical quality of a large or medium format image. In particular I love using a spot meter to place the tones where i want them on the film, by choosing a 'mid point' for my exposure. This process in itself gives me a far greater sense of connection between the light and landscape 'out there', my minds eye, and the camera between us.<br /><br />When I used my DSLR exclusively I didn't like the 3:2 aspect ratio for landscapes. So I started stitching digital files to create more 'medium format' ratio images that also had greater flexibility for enlargement. To stitch the images consistently I had to rely on hyperfocal focusing, a panormaic tripod head, and of course doing a lot of tripod-based work. The former aspect meant that I began to take more interest in prime lenses (with consistent focal lengths and DoF scales) over zooms, and I started to really see the value in a decent cable release! Two things happened during this transition period. the first was that I had to slow down whilst in the field, to make sure that the focus was correct across all the shots, that the metering would be sufficient, and that the overall composition was pleasing. The second was that the whole process became overly technical and focussed on getting a good stitch, rather than on engaging with the landscape. this two aspects seemed to be somewhat paradoxical - I want to slow down, but not to be overly distracted.<br /><br />When i started to use a medium format camera, the distraction of taking multiple, overlapping shots vanished. Once out in the field I was looking for a clean, expressive vision of how I felt looking out across the landscape. I had to be mindful of focus and metering of course, but this seemed to have a purpose. I wasn't a digital photographer trying to make an imitation medium format image. I was a medium format photographer, taking a medium format photograph. I hope that makes some sense?<br /><br />I still use my DSLR and enjoy it for what it is - a digital version of a 35mm based camera. I take family photographs with it and sometimes marvel at how clean and sharp the files seem to be. However I get much more enjoyment and satisfaction from using my film camera (I even like the smell of it). The results are also stunning, but it a deeper, more personally rewarding way.<br /><br />I would like to thank you Bruce. Like Steve, I was inspired to try film after seeing your portfolio. In particular your photos of Rum from Eigg gave me a kick start to stop dreaming and actually get on with it! thanks again.<br /><br />Sorry for this mini essay - i just think this is a facinating topic.<br>

<br />Here is a recent shot of Hadrian's wall using my 6x6 rollfilm camera and some fuji Velvia 50<br>

<br /><img src="http://www.eophotos.com/Pages/imageFile.asp?ID=3057" alt="" /></p>

<p>Right, I just spoke to the seller and it seems that the mechanism didn't work so they removed it from the kit. that explains that problem. apparently the reverse action isn't actually that important. I ran a roll of tri-x pushed to 1600 with lots of areas of continuous tone and it seemed to process fine without any signs of uneven development, so i will hold onto the unit.<br>

hope i haven't wasted anyone's time too much.</p>

<p>thanks again,</p>

<p>Ben</p>

<p>Hi Jerry,</p>

<p>many thanks for taking the time out to respond and post the link. </p>

<p>I had been through the online manual but just checked it again to be sure. I can't find much information about this mechanism so i guess it would normally be quite self explanatory. I will contact the seller and see if they can shed any light on the matter. in the mean time if any one else knows what might be up with this kit I'd welcome further input.<br>

thanks again.</p>

<p>Hello,</p>

<p>I recently bought a 2nd hand Jobo CPE 2 (not the plus version). It seems to work well except that the motor only rotates in one direction. reading the manual it seems that there is supposed to be a mechanism to switch the direction automatically after every 2 rotations (it also says that this mechanism can be swung out the way to allow for rotation in one direction). looking on the back of the rotating magnet base attached to the shaft, there is a white plastic collier with a short post protruding at 90 degrees to the base. From the manual it looks like this is part of the mechanism, except that i can't see how it can a) change the direction of the motor and b) be swung out the way.</p>

<p>I've searched through the forums but not found anything - any help would be much appreciated,</p>

<p>many thanks,</p>

<p>Ben</p>

<p>Ps if it makes any difference the tank also moves off centre as it rotates (as though the shaft is slightly bent), otherwise the motor seems fine and no obvious signs of damage. it was sold to me as a Excellent ++ condition.</p>

<p>Hi Chris,</p>

<p>Sorry I'm a bit late to add anything useful, but as Sean mentioned I have a v500 (which I got following Sean's advice actually). As I'm sure you will find it is a great scanner; easy to use, produces nice colours and capable of some good results. I don't have any experience with other scanners however so please take my comments with that caveat in mind.<br>

For prints from 6x6 medium format I've printed up to 16 inches. It took me a while to sort out some workflow issues to get to that point however (like NOT using multisampling - it doesn't align 100% on my scanner and so can make the image softer). Also I found the way in which you sharpen the scan is crucial - if you use too high a radius you will obscure fine details, so several aggressive passes at small radii is the way to go in my view. <br>

Of course the maximum print size is completely subjective. I compared the prints I was able to make at 16 inches with those of my D200 stitched side by side to form a square, and both seemed roughly comparible so that suited me. For anything larger I would personally follow Sean's advice and get a professional scan. One benefit I have found with the V500 workflow over the D200 purely digital workflow is that I find it much easier to get a colour image I am happy with for landscapes (using Velvia 50 or Astia) than converting my D200 raw files.<br>

Hope this info is helpful,<br>

Cheers,</p>

<p>Ben</p>

David,

 

many thanks for taking the time to answer my question (i was actually hoping you might comment, but didn't want to trouble you directly with an e-mail). I will feel more at ease finishing the current role of film and will get the back checked out at in the near future.

 

thanks again; much appreciated,

 

cheers,

 

Ben

Thanks for taking the time to comment. I thought that would probably be the case, but i'm just wondering; in the short term is this going to affect the film i currently have the back?

Hello,

 

I have a potential problem with the flag on an A12 back not always turning red

when I fire the camera (although the marker on the camera body itself always

turns red when it's supposed to). I've checked the forum and can't see that this

question has bee asked before, but appologies if it has.

 

After going through the manual with the camera in front of me all seems to be

working well other than this one issue. Specifically, I've noticed that on

occassion if I use the mirror prelease and then fire the shutter (or

alternativly just use the bulb setting on the lens) the little red flag on the

A12 doesn't always turn red with the flag on the body. This is an intermittent

problem.

 

I always make sure that both the back and the body match re. these flags (i.e.

if the back is detached and red, i fire the body without the back, then attached

the back, and crank both to the white 'ready' position, also vice versa, with a

'red' flag on the body i detach the A12, crank the body and then re-attach the

A12). My question is whether this is a major fault, or just a minor, chiefly

aestethtic problem?

 

If I detach the back and try the same procedures (pre-release etc.) the

auxillary shutter (barn doors) seem to open ok once i press the shutter release,

so I'm hoping that it might not be a 'show stopper'. Also I have currently

loaded the back with film, and i find that even if the white flag on the back

does not turn red with the body, i can re-cock the camera and the frame counter

on the back advances fine.

 

Many thanks for any feedback,

 

cheers,

 

Ben

Hi Kevin,

 

The channel mixer is found in photoshop. To my understanding it allows you to change the relative contibution of the various colour channels to your final image. If you use layers and masks you can then combine the best tones for each part of your image from each channel (or any combination of channels). Personally I now use DXO's film pack which includes B&W film presets. The imaging factory B&W plugin is also a useful accessory to the DXO film pack. whilst the film pack sets the characteristics of the film stock, the B&W plugin emulates darkroom printing processes, including printing with various multigrade papers. all these steps can be built into a photoshop action, so you can quickly convert a load of images without spending time on masks etc. I'll try and attach an example of a photo of James (same baby) taken with a D200, image processed to resemble: Ilford Delta 100 (DXO)'printed' at grade 3 on Ilford multigrade (B&W plugin).<div></div>

Just another to add to the list...<div></div>

I find the D200 B&W mode (in RAW and using capture) excellent for portraiture. i'm certainly not that knowledgable in this area, but the tonality for portraits/street and even photography looks great on screen and in print. the secret is to produce a good histogram (either accurate exposure, or by pushing/pulling the RAW file), using the levels command to clip slightly the shadows and highlights, and then using curves to create a pleasing constrast, range of tones through the histogram. once you have this set for one image you can apply it to the whole set (assuming similar lighting conditions). the results produce very pleasing, contrasty images with plenty of tonal range, without having to mix channels, use masks etc. however i find for landscapes, the channel mixer is a better option. i will try and attempt to attach an example below.<div></div>

Thanks Andy, Zach, for your feedback. I had considered MF (say a hassleblad) but at the moment i want to stick with the system i have - a D200 and associated lenses etc. i also want to avoid stacking as the quality does not seem to match a single exposure with noise reduction (using the D200).

 

cheers,

 

Ben

Thanks Shun,

 

unfotunately where i want to take star trails is away from light pollution, (up on the moors) so i wouldn't be able to plug the EH-6 into anything. i would also not be near my car as i tend to hike, so an external battery or the grip would be the solution i think - although very happy to recieve any other suggestions/workarounds.

Thanks Shun, i think you're probably right. my next decision is whether to save for an external battery pack or buy a MB-D200 and just do 1 hour exposures. the battery packs seem to be around ?300 here in the UK which is a lot more money than i want to spend just for the occasional star trail.

 

thanks again everybody for this discussion - its been really helpful.

Many thanks all for your responses.

 

Hans thank you in particular for actually trying it out for me. i've since spoken to John Ashley about his MB-D200 and the consensus seems to be that the action of removing the batteries is quite disruptive to a tipod mounted camera. i did consider whether over two hours such movement would become effectivily invisibile? unless of course it would result in the cameras orientation being permently shifted slightly.

I was wondering if it is possible to exchange an exhausted battery for a fresh

one in the MB-D200 grip whilst the camera is in the process of making an

exposure (or going through the noise reduction process). I want to take some

star trails (say of two hours duration) and have calculated i will need to use

3 batteries. although i know it is possibile to change batteries in the grip

whilst using the camera (i.e. the grip can work on two or just one battery), i

haven't been able to find any information on whether removing a battery in the

grip would terminate an ongoing (long) exposure if a second charged battery is

also present. i haven't yet bought the grip, but my decision to buy really

rests with its capabilities in 'hot swapping' batteries.

 

I do not want to stack multiple images to do my star trails, so a single

exposure with noise reduction is my goal.

 

many thanks for any information from those who own or have experience with the

MB-D200.

 

cheers,

 

Ben

thanks for this very helpful report. Last night i was starting to come to the same conclusion as John. I'd tried stacking my 100 images (roughly 50 minutes) with image stacker and the output even with darkframes was noticiably worse than a single 45 minute exposure i had done previously (with noise reduction). in fact the single exposure on the D200 is of startlingly good quality. I did improve the stacked image with the dust and sctraches filter which cleaned up a lot of the artifacts, but really i still don't think it matches the single exposure. just some additional feedback for the discussion.

John,

 

I've been following this thread with interest and tried to replicate your experiment (albeit with a single battery and 3rd party remote). i also found the camera just stopped taking pictures after approximately 100 frames. consequently i googled some relevant terms and found the following link;

 

http://regex.info/blog/2006-01-14/132

 

it appears that the limit of 100 continuous frames is part of the camera firmware. However apparently if you unlock the cable release and then begin again it will continue to take another 100 frames. not ideal but perhaps better than doing the single exposure and then darkframe?

 

hope that helps. i'd also be interested in seeing your star trails once you've worked out a system that suits you.

 

cheers,

 

Ben

Hi,

 

I've been using a D70 and now a D200. i've also tried a few different RAW software packages (capture one, Nikon NX, Photoshop CS2, and in regard to your question DXO). my advice (bearing in mind i'm no expert) would be to stop shooting jpg as Ronald already suggested. the D200 is known to not produce jpg's that match the quality of a well processed NEF file. from your post it sounds like you want a relativily striaght forward workflow package for your NEF files. from my experience i would suggest Capture one if you can afford it. in terms of workflow it can't be beaten (from the list above). the quality of the results is also excellent, at times bettering Nikon NX. it is my first choice for landscape work. Nikon NX is great for portraiture/weddings etc. its 'fill light' feature works well, and if you set the sharpening correctly and shoot your work in B&W in-camera, you can get some stunning results (other RAW software will re-convert your B&W Nefs into colour). i would avoide CS3 for converting the NEF's, but its great for working on the resulting TIFF files or JPGs. Also i've found DxO to be great for one thing - correcting optical distortions, but otherwise i find it's 'enhancements' over the top. Ronald's advice regarding PT lens sounds good. start shooting RAW and with some practice you'll see your image quality improve significantly from the jpg's - well just in my oppionion.

Just a thought but you could always start stitching individual frames from your D200 to get an overall higher resolution. Stitching comes with its own problems (and solutions) but overall can be an affective way of making bigger and sharper enlargements with very little outlay in terms of additional equipment. There are a number of photographers on photonet who use this approach, myself included.