don_satalic2

<p >Leibovitz risks losing the copyright to the images — and her entire life's work — if she doesn't pay back a $24 million loan by Tuesday. Art Capital Group, a New York company that issues short-term loans against fine and decorative arts and real estate, sued her in late July for breach of contract.</p>

<p >"We have clear contractual rights and will protect them in any scenario," said ACG spokesman Montieth Illingworth on Friday. "Our preference is for this to be resolved."<br>

Some experts say filing for bankruptcy reorganization could be the best option for Leibovitz, 59, who has put up as collateral her three historic Greenwich Village townhouses, an upstate property and work. She bought two of the townhouses in 2002, embarking on extensive renovations to combine them into one property.</p>

From those of you who do tintypes, what lens/camera combination do you feel will produce the "classic" Civil War

era look on tintype? Where can you get such equipment? Who are (were) the manufacturers? Thanks.

Thanks everyone for your help. Based on most responses (mostly Allen Friday), it would appear that only tintypes can be made to look like tintypes. So, what suggestions would you give for a camera and lens(es) for attempting this process?

I think this is the right place to ask this question. Tintype portraits from around the Civil War period had a

very shallow depth of field and an almost ethereal look. Robb Kendrick (http://www.robbkendrick.com/) creates

similar portraits today. What combination of camera and lens(es) creates this look? Is it possible to duplicate

that look using conventional black and white darkroom techniques or is it a function of the tintype?

The problem with these photographs is they have no digital manipulation. None are supersaturated or unsharpened or curves yoyoed. Where's the Gaussian blur or textures? What good are they anyway? A fauxtograph isn't any good these days unless you've PS'd on it.

Some of my income is derived from photographing abandoned industrial plants. I have an open commission with the Calumet Heritage Project to photograph the ACME Steel Coke plant on Chicago's notorious South Side (q.v. www.donsatalic.com). Detroit or Chicago--these are dangerous places. DO NOT GO ALONE! I've had guns pulled on me in such places. They were scrappers that thought I was going to steal their haul. I convinced them I was just a crazy photographer. I don't go alone anymore. The allure of such surreal landscapes compels image-makers to enter them, even at their own peril. Just be careful.

I just revisited this thread. Nick Brandt says I'm "soo wrong." Well, methinks he protests too much about no PS manipulation. I'm still spot on: Those images were PSed. Brandt does not cop to it because then NOBODY would be asking all these "How did he do it?" questions. Take one of your own images and play with the guassian blurs et al in various layers. Erase some areas. Then flatten it. You'll be surprised. Now, would anyone pay his prices if they thought he PSed them? There's your answer.

Bill:

 

Thanks for clearing up that mystery. You know, you'd have to be a mole to see in light that dim. How the heck did they do it? Thanks again.

I came across an old glass 10x12 Kodak Safelight filter. But here's

the interesting part--the filter is so dense you would need over a

1000 watt bulb to get through it. The color is dark, dark, dark

amber. The package has the following: Kodak Safelight Filter 10x12 in.

On the filter it reads: Kodak Safelight Filter Wratten Series 10.

That's it. Could this possibly be a surveillance filter for infrared work?

The Saunders 4550 (4x5) with a color head is outstanding, especially with VC papers. I print b&w almost exclusively and find this to be the best compromise. They show up on eBay all the time, and now because of the rush to digital, they are reasonablly priced. You will eventually want to work with 6x9, and this enlarger can take you all the way to 4x5 for the about same price (on eBay) as the 6x9 enlargers.

None of you are close because Brandt has not been forthcoming in these various interviews. Think about it: You're on the ground, close to the animals. Do you really believe you have time to bobble your lens around and focus and meter AND get a great shot all at the same time? He modified these images digitally, but because of the taint that is on digital manipulation, he states only that he adjusts curves and the like. No "manipulation." Ya...right. It's PhotoShop pure and simple.

Thanks everyone for your help. I tested everything mentioned. It must be the battery. The charger gets warm when the battery is in it, but there is almost no charge on the battery. Only enough to light a small LED in the camera, then it quickly fades. So, it might be the charger. Then again, it might be the camera. The eBay guy who sold it is trying to charge me a $150 "restocking" fee for taking it back. The seller is snappyauctions30. Be very cautious with this seller! I've turned him in to PayPal and eBay. Anyway...thanks again.

I just picked up a Rollei 6006 off eBay. The seller said it worked

fine. But, it was D.O.A. I can't tell if it's the battery, the battery

charger, or the camera. All I get is a little red light in the WL

viewer when I hit the shutter button. The darkslide is positioned

properly. Any insights?

You will not regret the 6x7 negative, and Pentax 67ii is an excellant choice. Get the 45mm and the 135mm macro lenses. Don't forget your tripod.

Jonas--Try Kodak TMZ exposed at EI 6400 and devlop in Rodinal. You'll have all the grain you'll need. Additional contrast can be obtained at the printing stage using magenta filtration.

Magda:

 

I use both the ArcBody and the Arca Swiss 6x9. Each has its own unique features. The ArcBody is fast and light...get in, get the shot, get out. The Arca Swiss 6x9 is slow and cumbersome, but it has all the movements. I shoot fine art architectural work, mostly abandoned industrial sites. The ArcBody is great for such inhospitable places. The Arca Swiss has a few more movements, which I need for some of my work.

 

The Arca Swiss, even used, is very expensive, and you need a lot of accessories to begin shooting--such as a binocular viewer, wide-angle bellows, various lens boards, extension bracket, film backs, lens wrench, compendium lens shade, etc. The lenses are also quite expensive. The Arcbody Kit with the 45mm lens is basically all you need besides a film back.

 

The movements in the ArcBody are similar to those offered in the Acra Swiss 6x9, except the Arca Swiss has more of them. For basic architectural work you almost exclusively use rise, and for landscape you need some tilt. The Arcbody has them both.

 

Unfortunately, the nature of my specific work calls for me to use the Arca Swiss 6x9 most of the time. The Arca Swiss can do everything the Arcbody does and more. But, when I can, I use the Arcbody because I like it. It's fun to shoot with. Heck it almost fits in my pocket.

 

The price you got for $3800 is OK...not great. My Arcbody is near mint and still has warranty; and I'd expect to get about $3200 if I were to go and sell it.

 

I hope this helps.

I own an Arcbody and use it often for architectural work. It's the neatest, smallest, fastest camera with movements you'll ever use. The Rodenstock lenses are superb. Will it do every job? No...but no camera can do that. Most arcitectural work requires rise; the Arcbody has more than enough, plus it has tilt. I'm curious--where are you looking for an Arcbody? Not many around.

Commercial architectural photography requires bracketing your shots for a variety of reasons. Roll film offers that flexibility, and Arca-Swiss 6x9 offers the best combination of features and functions.

Thanks David and Michael for your help.

Where can you find Copal 0, 1, 2 jam nuts? Adorama and B&H don't seem

to carry them.

Lex....There is indeed detail in the shadows. I "placed" the shadow details at Zone II-1/2 for this particular series. And I can clearly see those details. (I checked the meter, too.)

The HC-110 was fresh, newly purchased. I did two rolls at the same settings, same subjects in Rodinal...no problem. I did two rolls in HC-110 at two different times...same poor results. I agitated 5 secs every 30 secs. The dilution H was correctly mixed. The only logical answer seems that the HC-110 was on the shelf too long???? Thanks for the help.

I usually develop TXP320 in Rodinal, but I tried HC-110 at dilution H

(i.e., 1:14 at 9-1/2 min). Whoa....it looked like I underexposed by

two or three stops. The Rodinal rolls (same day, same subjects) were

perfect. Any clues?

I should have been clearer. I want to use only the lens with a view camera, not the focus mount. Sorry for the confusion.

I have a Rodenstock Grandagon 45mm lens in a focus mount. Can it be

modified to be used with a lensboard on a view camera?