paulrumohr

As a people shooter, I have to agree what a royal pain in the ass it is to have to rotate

my camera 95% of the time when I'm using 645.

To step back for a moment, it really is pure insanity. In retrospect, to know IN

ADVANCE that you are shooting people and then to choose this particular format

would be analagous to commiting to hammer nails in with the backside of a

screwdriver instead of buying a hammer.

Yes, I appreciate the economy of 645 with 120 film and the fact there are few 645

camera systems that offer vertically oriented shots without having to turn the camera.

And for all those landscape shooters out there who would be writing the antithesis to

this post of the world was the other way around- more power to you.

But the fact remains that turning that clumsy box on its side (ah yes, even that

elegant box that is the H1) really sucks.

It sucks because of the dorky flash brackets required to accomodate on camera flash

and the cables that get tangled everywhere, it sucks because it fatigues my left

shoulder when shooting all day on a commercial shoot, and I'll even take the cheap

shot by saying categorically all 645 cameras are ugly.

People photography usually appears in vertical formats commercially in publications

like magazines, posters, and corporate reports and in retail as framed portraits or

album shots. Editors will usually say to cover for double spreads by shooting

horizontally, but COME ON how many double spreads do they give you? I would

rather have to turn my camera on its side horizontally ONCE IN A WHILE to cover a

double spread than be locked into that horizontal orientation forever.

My salvation has been the square and the rotating back of 4x5, both allowing all my

crop happy ADs to recompose to their delight (which I really don't mind actually).

I am convinced I must live in some parallel universe. I'm pretty sure that in some

other dimension, Apple is the computer of choice, 645s are svelte and vertically

oriented, and I am much better looking.

Was at Samy's camera looking at an H1. The demo had a lot of paint missing from

the top and sides of the prism and various other areas around the body and back. (Is

it paint chipping off?)

I don't think the particular camera had been slammed around too much. I've seen

some pretty beat up Hassy V bodies, but only after some years of serious use or

abuse.

Hasselblad generally has excellent resale, but if cosmetics still continues to influence

a used camera's price, I have a feeling that H1 owners may find their cameras rating

lower on the scale unless they take very good care of their camera bodies.

Anyone else see the paint/enamel chipping on the pretty H1s?

Look into the new Hakuba Carbon Fiber Tripods like the HG503 and 504MX. I have

the 504 I use with a Mamiya 7 and love it for travelling.

It is so compact and very stable. I even like the little magnesium pan head that

comes with it, all for $300.

Audun,

You are correct. Hasselblad jams in new cameras are almost usually due to user

error. Unless someone instructs you personally on how to handle the camera, or

unless you read a resource that warns you of mishandling errors, someone new to the

system will in time jam their new hasselblad.

With that being said, they will probably never do it again. And then they are officially

part of the club!

Simon,

Polaroid films do not look like any transparency film. They are not even close. They

are simply tools for checking LIGHTING and COMPOSITION issues.

Notice I haven't included EXPOSURE, because in my experience, it is honestly useless

at

that too. I am speaking at the level of someone who runs test rolls in similar lighting

conditions with a particular emulsion batch before shooting a job in the same

lighting.

Notice I haven't included CONTRAST, because it's useless at that too. I haven't

included COLOR, because you guessed it, it AIN'T there.

To illustrate my point, after my film test I know the EXACT exposure to set my camera

so that if run my E6 normal they'll be perfect with normal processing at my pro lab for

the job I'm doing.

If I shoot a similar speed polaroid at these settings, I MAY or MAY NOT get a good

looking polaroid. I would say if you really want exposure control, FORGET ABOUT

TRYING TO MATCH POLAROID EXPOSURES TO FILM.

Instead, test the film stocks you want to use heavily so you understand their color,

contrast and exposure characteristics. I suggest focussing your study on your FILM in

the camera, and not polaroids.

Roberto,

Do you use a monitor calibration device form ColorVision, Gretag Macbeth, Color Vision, or Monaco to ensure your monitor is properly showing you the color data recoreded by your scan of Velvia?

You might have tweaked your monitor to make your scan look good, which you should never do. That's because the data in the scan is the data you've got- you can't make the info in your image file any better by adjusting your monitor which is only viewing it.

But to your main question- Why my Reds are not RED?

I wonder how it would affect unit sales if all the printer manufacturer's advertised their printers like this:

Hey! Buy our new Photo Quality Inkjet printer for $99! The printer drivers and settings we have designed for it are pretty darned good! However, if you are a PESKY photographer and want REALLY accurate color out of our printer you can have it BUT-

YOU MUST

1) Learn how to use the Color Settings controls in Photoshop

2) Learn how to build your own Custom Printer Profiles for each combination of paper and ink you want to use with a Color Spectrophotometer

3) Buy the hardware and software required to do this (Gretag Macbeth Eye One $3000 to Color Vision's RGB Profiler Pro + Color Savy's Color Mouse $1700)

4) Spend the time putting the whole puzzle together

I have spent what seems a lifetime trying to get good looking prints (no, take that back- professional lab quality color matched prints) from what is provided by the printer manufacturer's drivers and have had no success.

I should also point out although it should be already painfully obvious to any one who has already tried- the Tech Support at your Printer manufacturer don't know how to make your reds RED. They know how to eliminate your banding by cleaning your nozzles, and that's about it.

The way to your reds my friend is profiling your monitor with a color calibration device, and springing for printer calibration hardware and software.

I know the printer calibration stuff is prohibitively expensive, so as a second less desirable (but more economic solution) you may wish to purchase a premade "canned" profile for your printer through a vendor like inkjetmall.com.

I hate to tell you, but the WLF and the Accumatte is the best combination to focus with. It's 4X! That's huge.

The prism may help with composition if you're not used to reverse viewing, but the lower magnification obviously makes EVERYTHING look smaller (including the focusing aids on the accumatte) and WILL make it MORE difficult to focus relative to the WL.

Do you possibly need a diopter for the WL?

The new Calumet mailer has a new Microtek medium format scanner called the Microtek Artix Scan 120. It looks exactly like the Polaroid scanner (they used to make) and scans up to 6X9.

4000 optical dpi, 3.9 DMax, Firewire, and Silverfast AI for $1999.

My less important clients pay me less, so yes, they are less important.

You pay more, you get more.

I could even prioritize my clients on a list, and if I had to get rid of them one by one, I know which ones I'd cast into the pits of hell, and which ones I'd keep.

You don't paint a Picasso for everyone. And beer budgets buy beer, not champagne.

With all the horrible things I've said, I do gratefully appreciate all business I get. :-)

How d'ya like them crackers, Doug?

By the way, I feel this is a good place to share how I really feel about issues surrounding the business of photography. If these ideas seem to radical, I'm perfectly content to stick to talking about filter diameters and brand X versus Y lenses.

I await the humorless responses that will no doubt follow.

Thomas,

For stuff that looks OK to most people, you will probably be fine shooting portraits with tungsten film under tungsten lighting. If you're afraid that they'll be totally out of whack, they shouldn't be.

But think about this....

For EXACT Color:

You are at the mercy of chance without a color meter or the opportunity to test the tungsten transparency film under the lights you plan to use beforehand.

There is an incredible amount of variation with tungsten sources, along both the LB axis (amber/blue) and the CC axis (CC magenta, green).

If you really want control over your color for this shoot, I recommend renting a color meter and determining what filter pack you will need to get a neutral balance with tungsten film.

Once you determine a filter pack that will get you a neutral balance using the hot lights and film you plan to use, you can then make the subjective decision whether or not to warm (use 81 series filters) or cool (use 82 series filters) the film for your people shots.

This is very precise color control. For most of my less critical clients and art directors, I wouldn't worry about color correction too much.

But for my important clients- YOU BET I WOULD!

Hey- how about tungsten color neg if you're really worried? You could shoot it as backup.

Some suggestions:

Your meter may be reading infrared energy that your meter can see, but you cannot.

The meter then recommends an exposure that results in underexposure on film. You can test this by seeing how much your spot meter jumps when pointed at a TV IR remote control transmitter.

The only meter baffled against infrared (and other non-visual wavelengths) I believe is the Zone IV modified meters.

Since you are using medium format, you may consider bracketing on your morning and sunset shots.

Another possibility is that you are getting technically correct exposures, but they do not represent what you were seeing emotionally/expressively. Bracketing is also a good solution here.

You have indicated that you are aware of the latitude limitations of film. With transparency shots, you may have to choose to sacrifice some shadow or highlight to get your shot in high contrast scenes.

And finally, have you tested your spot meter with a grey card against the Sunny 16 rule?

I prefer the 55mm and the 80mm (in 645) for fashion. Maybe the 150, max.

I'm just curious why you want the long telephotos. How were you planning to communicate with your models from 20 to 30 feet away from them?

Do you have a very loud voice that you can use all day to tell them what to do? Or maybe a radio set with an assistant to tell them to turn their head to the right, or smile, or jump?

I would recommend renting these lenses first. They are special purpose lenses, they DO have their own unique look, but they are not absolutely necessary for you to get great fantastic fashion and portait images.

I just did a film test of E100G for a commercial film shoot I have today. I have to tell you that I really like it! I'm going to eagerly look forward to testing the new Astia too.

It is as claimed, extremely fine grain and incredibly uniform in size- which I think is doing an awesome good job of hiding it.

Doesn't the introduction of a piece of glass cause (spherical?) aberation at the film/polaroid plane?

If the answer is no effect or aberation, then why wouldn't you design A12 backs or A24 backs with glass in front of them too?

Wouldn't the error almost preclude the use of using pos/neg 665 for checking sharpness with the Hasselblad like you would with 4X5?

If you're subject matter is primarily static and you must use slide film, don't forget to bracket heavily if this is your first time out with that particular film.

If you get the opportunity to shoot neg, may I suggest the Fuji NPS or new improved NPH. I just recently shot a tough daylight/fluorescent/incandescent set up (location office interior) with great success using NPS and then having prints made by a good color printer.

I can't remember the EXACT explanation, but I would recommend calling NPC and asking them exactly WHY they do not use glass in their Hassy Pola back.

It's not like the Hasselblad has some exotic rare earth glass specially manufactured for their back, the design looks pretty straight forward and could have probably been easily knocked off by NPC.

I'd like to also point out that Hasselblad seems to be the only manufacturer who uses a glass plate in their polaroid back, and after having seen more than my share of polaroids coming out of numerous backs, I don't believe the hasselblad's results are radically sharper than any other system's results.

If the NPC has any weakness at all, it may be the way it hinges on the back of the camera. According to a technician at Samy's, some of the earlier 500 bodies have a softer metal in the back hinges on the bodies that can bend if the user doesn't make a habit of carefully removing and attaching the NPC back.

If I recall correctly, the NPC technician explained an additional reason for the glass plate was to make it cross compatible between the different kinds of Hassy bodies, but give NPC a call- there definitely is a reason they don't choose to use glass- it's not because they are being cheap.

I would recommend walking around with your proposed equipment list for just one day around your home town.

You may wish to reconsider the RB kit as your travel camera afterwards.

I have to ask- do you have abnormal human strength and endurance?

Anatole,

You are a brand snob and deserve to overpay for your lights. I don't really give a damn about what you think.

Just wanted to mention a new White Lightning UV X-Series Flash Tube is $34.95. A 250 Watt modelling lamp is $19.95.

I also have just read in the White Lightning brochure they will make 220V versions of their lights for "additional cost". Looking at what they charge for flashtubes, I'm sure it's a pretty modest surcharge.

This now makes my beloved White Lightning available for export to all my Super Cool Euro colleagues! Nashville, Tennessee est tres cool, non?

If you haven't had the chance to look, White Lightning has a brand new portable powerpack. Profoto has a very impressive pack too, called the 7b, which I'm sure many of you might be familiar with. Absolutely no gripes with the 7b and have rented it myself many times.

However, the White Lightning Vagabond might fit a little better in some of our budgets at $500 (five hundred, not five thousand) for the complete system, and additional batteries running $40. And that $40 battery gives you 200 full power flashes at 1320WS. Or 400 flashes at 660WS.

It will recharge anywhere in the world (120V/220V). It can run off your car's cigarette lighter plug in. And although if you may get fewer flashes and slow recycling when you hook up your 10 White Lightnings (13,200 WS total) simultaneously to the powerpack- you do have those extra $40 batteries charged up nearby, right?

Unfreaking unbelievable Mr. Buff- keep those engineers working.

'"Profoto has the best "quality of light".'

"As to the quality of light, AH! The big conundrum. Is there any truth to it? I don't know. Profoto seems to me to be flattering to people and fashion photography with sparkle in the light while Broncolor seems to have the clear, prosaic, more matter-of-fact light, telling it like it is. Perhaps this has everything to do with Profoto's reflectors and their surfaces."

Oh well, so much for the photographer being responsible for good lighting any more. I guess all of us who make a living at this have just become great purchasing managers for our own studios, selecting the best products to make our mediocre photography look better. Sigh.

I'd like to try to cut through some of the marketing hype you're holding in those very sexy (and very expensive/price passed on to the consumer) Profoto and Sinar Bron catalogs.

I have used both systems you are considering and many more and through personal experience I can tell you there is nothing inherently special about the systems you are looking at except they are remarkably over priced and one might have a few boutique features the other does not (e.g. Broncolor's packs holding slightly more consistent color temperature output as they are dialed down, but oh my, what a price you'll pay for this feature).

Remember a flash systems is a collection of capacitors, flash tubes and a control board. Now of course a digital interface (Broncolor, Balcar, Calumet) might be a little fancier than manual control systems (Profoto, Dynalite), but at the end of the day remember all systems do the same thing- they put an electrical arc in a gas flash tube to produce something close to daylight balanced light.

Check out and compare the flash specs, but make sure YOU test the lights YOU are going to buy with an YOUR exposure and color meter. Find out what you are really buying in terms of real power and color temperature. Put on the accessories you want on the system and meter! The "quality of light"- as it has always been is dependant of the size, shape and distance of the radiating light source. The light's "color" is also affected by the color of the material you are bouncing light off or shooting through.

A Profoto or Dynaliite system both flashing at 5000K and f11 values in the same silver Westcott umbrella will look NO different on the same film stock. Really. A model does not glow slightly nicer with the Profoto.

And what if during the test they're slightly different? What if one is 5200K and the other is 4800K? Dilemna? What's good? What's bad?

There is no good and bad. Thats why studio shooters have LB light balancing filters (LB 81 and 82 series filters) and color correcting filters (usually CC magenta and green). Besides, if you are going to be a master of fashion lighting, you're not just planning to shoot the lights STRAIGHT, without putting your unique signature on the shot are you?

But what about the MARVELLOUS Profoto accesories? All I can say is that if you like another systems accessory, BUY IT and have it modified for your system. I think here in the US, there have been more Profoto flashes popped through Elinchrom Octabanks than Elinchrom strobe. I use the exotic Frenchy Balcar prismalights and the legendary Diamond Box beauty dish mounted on (gasp, Mon Dieu) my modest White Lightning Ultras.

Admittedly, if you have specialized needs like extremely short flash durations for freezing fluids in motion or dancer's exploding off the studio floor into the air or exteme recycling at high power, then one might be able to justify the expense of a high end pack system.

Personally, I like monolights because they are easy to use, they travel well, usually have built in slaves and if one goes down you're not totally screwed. Also having the power source and flash tube self contained in the same unit allows these units to be extremely efficient- I have seen significant power loss in heads on long head extensions. Sometimes they are so far away from the packs that the light loss is close to 1 stop.

As far as reputation in the fashion/advertising industry, I really hope you mean with respect to other photographers. No art director has ever checked the brand of my lighting and approved or disapproved of what we were shooting at the time.

If you weren't primarily intending to use them in Europe, I would have recommended looking into the White Lighning X-Series from Paul C. Buff. If you did not like them, you could have returned them for a full refund. I use them daily for beauty and fashion assignments and they are excellent value with a Balcar mounting system. Ask your Profoto or Broncolor dealer if you can return the lights because you just don't like them after 30 days!

Good luck with your decision. But remember there is nothing inherently magical about a studio flash system. The magic will be in the WAY you light with it. Will it be you or the flash system that failed to deliver when the bad pictures come back?

"The Hasselblad sound now is like an empty Vulcan."

Umm, what exactly do you mean? Could you describe the sound another way? I am trying to imagine what Leonard Nimoy might sound like completely hollow, but I just can't put my finger on it.

Thanks!

After having used a color temp meter for a few months, I am wondering how I even had the cahones to shoot without one.

What I've learned- I cannot accurately judge color temperature with my eye. Not ambient, and no way in studio! I have been practicing using the guess and check the meter method, and although I am getting better, I still am often wrong.

Using the meter has mahe me a lot more confident shooting transparency. After shooting several tests of different stocks metered very carefully with both my exposure meter and color meter, I now have a repeatable palette to work with.

I now have a "film palette" that I can refer to when shooting jobs. I know how EPP and Astia look at LB indexes of -20, -10, 0, +10, +20 et al and I can repeatedly place it on chrome! Alternatively, if the light is not at the value I need, I can filter to MY desired look or value.

It reminds me a little of the much maligned Dean Collin's Chromazone method of placing color. Although I don't believe Dean took it far enough- he should have also kept a record of the color temperature too, for absolute repeatability of colors!

For years I have been getting back chromes and saying, well, that's what the light looked at. Or, I have been making half assed guesses about the color of the light- oh, it looks a little cool, I'll use an 81A. Sometimes it even worked. But I have never been in total control of my transparency as I am now.

If you are interested in more control over your transparency work, I would recommend you testing and using a color meter.

I will answer my own question- there are some fantastic target color temperature values- but they differ for each of the films I've tested!