david_vanmeter

First, let me say that Dave Richart's response is right on the money!

I feel about "Arches" as you do about half dome...give me a break. I

loved it, well said, sir! As to the question posed, I think that a

certain arrogance develops in many of the photographers who label

themsleves as "serious". They tend to believe that they are saving

something for future generations. These are the same people who leave

cigarette butts, film cans, film boxes, papers, food wrappers, etc. in

the name of preserving the natural beauty of a park. I am, by no

means, an eco-nut, however you really do need to savor the irony of

the actions of these "serious" photographers. I say no to special

permits for photographers. We are no better than a family with their

video camera. Maybe this will force photographers to start looking at

everything they have missed in their own back yard.

I get the blue tone and I like it. No point rockin' that boat. :-)

Besides I could never get amidol to work for me. I am sure it was

something I was doing wrong but I didn't really want to take the time

to figure it out.

I was just wondering if anyone else on this newsgroup would be attending the Cole Weston Workshop in October?

Because I also wear and analog watch, drive an old Volvo, work on

computers all day, etc. I salute you! We may be dinosaurs but look at

all the attention a T-Rex gets these days. Maybe there is hope for us.

When all the crappy inkjet prints fade and our silver prints are still

pristine, who will be laughing then. Gow long could it be before a

T-Rex walks again. Keep rolling (and shooting).

I also vote for standard backpacks. I have a Lowe Alpine

internal frame backpack with 6000 Cubic inches of storage. This is

made by the same company who makes the LowePro photo packs. I added my

own foam (free) and can carry all of my 8x10 gear plus a 4x5 back and

10 holders of each film size and can still dance. Shame on LowePro for

charging such ridiculous prices for small "vertical market" backpacks.

I paid $150 for my pack and for something that would have carried much

less from LowePro I would have paid aound $400.

With all due respect to the previous responses I will part company

with them and say the I prefer Kodak E100S or even Fuji Astia. I think

it has everything to do with how we, as individuals, perceive color. I

find Velvia far too artificial in its color and it has a tendency to

turn things green that aren't really green. My advice to you is to not

listen to our advice and try out some different films until you get

the results you want to see. BTW, B&W makes a snappy landscape too.

Andy, Another great advantage to long exposures is the removal of

unwanted, pesky moving objects like... people! 2 weeks ago I was

shooting in the Hocking Hills region of Ohio. I metered off of the

shadowed part of what is reputed to be the largest cave of its type.

Less of a cave and more of a depression. Anyway, after fuguring

reciprocity failure for the film I came up with 8 minutes at f/64.

Worked out brilliantly because at least 100 people trudged right

through the middle of the picture and not a one showed up in the

negative. As to your comments on shooting long exposures on 35mm using

Velvia, I noticed that in 35mm, reciprocity failure was not nearly the

problem it is in large format. I was wondering if that might have

something to do with the concentration of light. I could be way off

base here, wouldn't be the first time.

Might as well jump on this bandwagon. I agree with the thumbs down to

Delta 100. I initially used this film (8x10) with Pyro developer and

had satisfactory results. When I finally got ahold of some HP5 and FP4

I was a much happier camper. These two films from Ilford sing in Pyro.

Anothe vote for Tachihara from me! I had the opportunity to set up a

Tach, a Wisner, and a Wista and the Tach was the most stable of the

three. I also think the joinery is far superior.

I am new to palladium printing and have read the book by Dick Arentz as well as a few other resources. The one thing I am having trouble with is exposure. Everything I have read says I should see a latent image like a printing out paper but I have yet to see anything remotely like this. My exposures have been completely black to lightly muddy. I know... a test strip, but I am wondering if the latent image problem is as significant as I am making it out to be. I guess I am asking for some guidance from someone here with practical experience in this type of printing. Thanks in advance!

I had a notion that I could make a pinhole "lens" for my 8x10 camera. Does anyone have any experience with this or recommendations that would save me a lot of headaches. Also, what are the possibilities for using shifts, tilts, etc.?

Thanks folks, you are a wealth of info!

To be honest, I did not care for PlusX in PMK at all. I haven't used a

Kodak film yet that I liked the results of in PMK. Maybe if you have

some HC-110 lying around you would be better off, IMHO.

On a less technical note, I have a Goertz Gold Rim Dagor (12") and I

love it! Sharp as the sharpest tack you can find! Handles color and

black and white like a champ. You can have it when you pry it from my

cold, dead fingers. Or am I obsessing?

I am curious to know what measures people have had to go to in order to eliminate dust from negatives when printing. This is a constant battle for me and it isn't helped by my perfectionist nature. I can brush, blow (before you say it, not with my mouth) and curse at negatives and dust will still appear where it wasn't 15 seconds ago.I have cleaned the enlarger out on several occasions and cover it between uses. I clean contact printing frames regularly and practicly between each print. I have heard that it is a good idea to ground your enlarger but I am unclear what this does for me. I am looking for the definitive solution folks! Thanks in advance.

Not to be a smart aleck but have you tried a de-humidifier?

With regards to the Orbit 8x10, it is my understanding that the f/64

case will only hold 4x5 film holders. For my Tachihara 8x10 I went

with a Lowe Alpine Contour Classic 90+15 internal frame back pack.

With judicious and ample use of closed and open cell foam I can carry

my camera, 10 film holders, focusing cloth, lens, etc and have room to

spare for food and drink. With all of my equipment I was able to dance

with my wife while wearing the pack in the living room (this is a good

test and amused my wife no end). This pack is around $150 retail.

Quite a savings over those pesky Lowe Pros, etc.

Can anyone tell me if the shutter speeds on the Ilex #4 shutters are stepped according to the indicated times or are they contiguous. In other words, can I set an approximate shutter speed between the indicated speeds?

I prefer to look at it as using the right tool for the right job. If I

shoot Ilford films, I use Pyro. I did not care for what Pyro did to my

PlusX negs so I use HC-110 for that film and I am quite happy with the

results.

While I have my theories on why this happened I wanted to pass on something that happened to me the first time I tried tray developing 8x10. First, that film is darned slippery when you have 2 or more in there. That aside, I went through the entire process and had just finished fixing in TF-4. I thought I was hot stuff at this point. I turned on the lights and to my horror, there was still a sheet of film (I started with 4) in the PMK! I stood and stared at it, waiting for it to turn in the light. It did nothing. I pulled it out, gave it a rinse then a dip in the stop bath, dropped in the TF-4 and fixed as normal. I then rejoined it with the rest of the film for post-development staining and a long wash. Oddly enough, this was the best neg of the bunch. I would be interested in hearing anyone else's theory on why I did not destroy a perfectly good neg with a rookie blunder.

Can anyone tell me how many sheets of 8x10 film I can expect to process in a 1 liter solution of PMK pyro (tray developing) before it is exhausted? I am reasonably sure that I have some oomph left after 4 sheets. Also, does it make a difference if I process sheets one at a time or 4 at a time considering the second trip to the developer after fixing for additional staining?

Further information: I have tried Series VII (too small), Series VIII

(too big), and 58mm (hair too big), and 55mm (too small).

I am relatively new to large format and recently purchased a 12" f/6.8 Goerz Gold Rim Dagor mounted in #4 Ilex shutter. The problem I have run into is determining the filter size for this lens. Nothing I have tried will fit it. Can anyone enlighten me as to what I should be looking for or will I need to get an adapter fabricated?

Thank you,

David N. VanMeter