Jump to content

a._valerio

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    188

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by a._valerio

    What current film similar to Kodak Ektapress PJM-640 Multispeed?

    in The Wet Darkroom: Film, Paper & Chemistry

    Posted

    <p>Interesting!<br />I shot 2 rolls of HD 400 and developed at the same time as this roll of PJM, and the old PJM totally beat up the brand-new HD 400! The HD was too contrasty, had low shadow detail, and fake-looking color. Surprising...would have thought HD-400 would be similar to Royal God and Supra, which I thought were descended from Ektapress.<br /><br />There's a bit of shadow fog on the PJM even though the film base is clear in unexposed regions. But it still looks great. As for warmth, I am going by how the rolls scanned at the lab. And believe it or not, the 6MP minilab scans (which are usually so-so and often worse than those out of my Minolta Dual Scan IIII) of the PJM roll (shot outside) are good enough to print at 12x18 inches! But you have to understand that the lighting that day was the best you could ever ask for for people pics...cloudy, but still some sun coming through. I commented to another photographer how you don't need flash on a day like that, and he agreed.<br /><br />Perhaps the warmth, if not a scanning variation, is partially due to the age of the film...? Also, the film has a certain "bite" to it...it looks natural, but there is something about it that reminds me of cross-processed E-6 film in C-41 chemistry...but in a very, very, subtle sort of way. Any ideas what ths is due to? In any case, I love the look and it worked perfectly.<br /><br />I had purchased a bunch of expired but frozen film from a guy on ebay. Some if it was garbage, but not this stuff! I have a couple more rolls left, and might re-freeze them because I don't think I'll get to use them soon. I also have some PJB 400 Ektapress from the same guy, but wanted to use the highest speed film up first. Is PJB almost the same as PJM?</p>

    What current film similar to Kodak Ektapress PJM-640 Multispeed?

    in The Wet Darkroom: Film, Paper & Chemistry

    Posted

    <p>Ron,<br />Thanks. So far, the one that I thought looked the closest was Portra 800. Does that make sense? Is Portra 800 at all related to PJM? Seems to have similar very wide latitude and warm colors. Maybe if I rate Porta 800 at 640 or 500 it will look more like the PJM? I've only tried it at EI 800 so far...and it's quite expensive.<br />Ultra Color 400 doesn't do it for me; I don't think Gold does, either. What about 400VC? is that similar to Ektapress at all?<br />The other thing is, the fog on the PJM is nowhere near as bad as I would have thought. The shadows still have plenty of detail, and an unexposed frame is perfectly clear. Is that to be expected? It is from 1998 or something.</p>

    FM2N diopter correction

    in Nikon

    Posted

    <p>Of course.<br>

    My point was simply that if someone ordinarily wears glasses, for example -2.0D distance glasses, he/she would have to purchase a -3.0D Nikon eyepiece in order to preserve the -1.0D acommodation value.<br>

    This is because the Nikon -3.0D eyepiece actually contains a lens with refractive power equal to -2.0D. And when combined with the camera viewfinder's native value of -1.0D, it equals -3.0D. Thus, since it takes -2.0D to put our nearsighted photographer's at infinity (zero acommodation), there is an extra -1.0D left over, just as Nikon intended. But had the photographer simply bought a -2.0D eyepiece, the value would be 0.0D. Each eyepiece is downrated one negative diopter from the marked value.</p>

    FM2N diopter correction

    in Nikon

    Posted

    <p>Mike, Your explanation is perfectly sound, and you sound like an expert on this topic.</p>

    <p>I just have one clarification to make about what you said:</p>

    <p>"Furthermore the use of a +1.0 diopter would negate the -1.0D effect that Nikon has built in to the viewfinder; and they have done so for a good reason. Except when gazing into the far distance everyone has a reflexive tendency to apply some amount of accomodation; it is difficult to supress this tendency. Therefore Nikon has chosen to incorporate a correction into the viewfinder that places the virtual image at a distance of one meter. ...Thus my recommendation to use a diopter lens having the same power as his normal distance correction..."</p>

    <p>If an eyeglass wearer about to buy an eyepiece diopter lens person wants to preserve the -1.0D accomadation value, he or she would have to choose a Nikon eyepiece rated -1.0D higher than that used for distance vision. I think Nikon has rated their eyepieces just fine as is. No compensation is necessary. Just buy the one rated for your distance vision and work with no accomodation. Following this rule will help to reduce eyestrain during prolonged shooting, especially important for pros. This is why Nikon and other camera companies now feature variable diopter viewfinders as standard on all current cameras. You can change it as you need to based on light, eyestrain, and other variables.</p>

    <p>One meter is one meter is one diopter, and nothing will ever change this. But Nikon has rated their interchangeable eyepieces in such a way that eyeglass wearers must use infinuty focus. I do find it odd that non-wearers must use one diopter of accomodation...a double standard. Once again, the variable diopter is the solution. Perhaps there is a small market for such a device that could be made for older cameras.</p>

    <p> </p>

    Old films: Kodak Max GC-8 and GT-2 and VR CL-200 and Fuji Super G Press CZ-800

    in The Wet Darkroom: Film, Paper & Chemistry

    Posted

    I recently used some old Gold Max 800 (GT-2) that I got off ebay. It worked all right, but I had to rate it at EI 320.

    When was this from?

     

    I also have some Gold Max 400 GC-8, datred 11/2005 fro, the same ebay purchase. What is the current version? Not

    8 obviously.

     

    I also have been using some old Kodak Ektapress PJM-640 Multi Speed. Date is 1999. Been rating it at EI 320 and

    works decently.

     

    Last year, I shot some older CL-200 (aka VR 200 with a 1999 expiration) that I bought back in 1997. You never hear

    about CL-200. Is it still around? I don't know if the current VR-Plus sold in Europe is the same.

     

     

    Finally, I have a roll of old Fuji CZ-800 called "Super G Press". I shot some of it today, but rated it at EI 160. how old

    is it likely to be? I don't know if the oclor will be any good, but I do expect to get b&w images out of it at the very

    least.

    Latest Kodachrome Emulsion Number

    in The Wet Darkroom: Film, Paper & Chemistry

    Posted

    "I received my latest order from B&H this week. It consisted of emulsion #1558, expiring 09/2009 and #1557, expiring

    11/2009. I'll be ordering more in a month or two. Maybe those rolls will have a 2010 expiration date! Dwayne's, via

    Wal-Mart is returning the processed slides in either 7 or 8 days with the same great Dwayne's quality for only

    $4.88+tax!

     

    Robert Johnson"

     

    Why would the higher emulsion number have an loder expiration date???

    How to mask focusing screen for 8x10 format?

    in Nikon

    Posted

    I want to mask or mark a focusing screen for the 8x10 format.

     

    What sort of marker or other marking implement should I use to ensure it does not rub off? WHich side of the screen?

     

    How do I measure the screen to determine where to draw the lines? Camera is a D1H

     

    Thanks.

    the end of my camera-buying days

    in Nikon

    Posted

    FPW,

     

    By "optical enhancement" I meant software augmentation of optical quality. Using "signal processing" to cancel out

    the "physical" signatures of optical issues. Or, as you put it, a software "trick" that neutralizes much of the

    issue after the fact. DXo, D-Lighting, Digital ICE, interpolation schemes, Noise reduction, Image Dust-off, and

    the new digital film effects "filters" are all current attempts. The demosaicing algorithms in modern DSLRs also fit

    into the category of signal processing, I believe.

     

    Now, manufacturers of lenses must not become "lazy" as a consequence of advancements in signal processing.

    Chromatic issues and perspective "distortions" are PHYSICAL effects, and are just as fundamentally physical

    as the Doppler Effect and spatial perspective. If manufacturers rely too heavily upon digital signal processing, we

    may end up in the long run with lenses that are optically worse than those of today. Caution and discrimination do

    need to be exercised.

     

    Personally, I don't believe what several pioneering electrical engineers are saying. There are some researchers who

    are working on digital sensors with 100 million, 500 million, and even 1000 million photosites. Some of these

    prototype sensors are not physically any larger than those in our current DSLRs. Some of these people are claiming

    that in the near future ~15 years that teh tiniest digital sensors used in camera phones will contain 50+ megapixels,

    and that digital point-and-shoot cameras will have 1 Gigapixel sensors. Even if somehow, it does become possible to

    cram this many photosites into such a small area, where does that leave medium format sensors? 20 thousand

    million pixels in a 36x48mm area??? Clearly, if this is really where the state of the technology is headed, there is

    going to have to be some digital signal processing "miracle" (revolution). How could such a densely-packed device

    gather enough light and perform properly without advanced "software enhancement" of some sort?

    the end of my camera-buying days

    in Nikon

    Posted

    Software processing may one day be the great equalizer of image quality, just as film was.

     

    Your 30MP camera might not have much advantage over your buddy's 24MP 5 years from now, due to software interpolation, noise reduction, and optical enhancement.

     

    I can see the market stabilizing in the next 5 years. We're in the midst of the digital SLR boom right now, just like the SLR boom of the 1980s. Look at point and shoot digitals: growth has been slowing because people have already bought.

     

    Once the pro users settle down and hang onto their cameras for 5 years or more (assuming they last) we will see amateurs keeping DSLRs for a decade or more. In professional editorial and stock photography, It would be rediculous for publishers, agencies, clients, and editors to continue to mandate that photographers must use a camera of a certain MP rating, increasing it with each newest generation of DSLRs, forcing pro users to upgrade every two years against their will. This would be crazy once we hit affordable 24MP full-frame. In fact, it's almost crazy right now, since the 12MP full-frame probably approaches, meets, or even exceeds some of what is attainable with 645 (strictly speaking about resolving power and noise.grain).

     

    First they said you had to have a 6MP or higher (DX) camera. Then it was 8MP. Then Full-frame 11MP (1Ds) or greater for some agencies and publications. Now what? They cannot keep arbitrarily increasing their standards in the midst of diminishing returns now that we have reached (and exceeded) the desired MP ratings that everyone wanted since the beginning of digital SLRs.

    D1 battery - proper recharging and storage

    in Nikon

    Posted

    That site has some interesting information. But I wonder how it translated into real-life. For example, if one were to not use the battery for a month, would it be better to run it down in the camera, or to recharge it prior to storage?

     

    And when in use, is it better to let it run down, or to only use it partway and then top it off?

     

    And is refresh better done just prior to storage or right before use after storage?

    D1 battery - proper recharging and storage

    in Nikon

    Posted

    For the D1 battery pack (EN4) what's the proper way to store the battery for

    several weeks to maximize performance and longevity?

     

    One of my two three-year-old EN4s has bitten the dust of late. It has only had

    approx 25 charges put through it, with long periods of inactivity at times. I've

    recently gotten some new ones and I don't want the same thing to happen. But

    realistically I don't use the D1H every week.

×
×
  • Create New...