matt_oulman

Ignore Bill's cynicism...

Get yourself a Cokin "P" Universal adapter (or LEE, or others)- that fits over the rim of the lens barrel and tightens with plastic "set-screw" like screws to the outside of the lens.

Then, with the rectangular filters, your in business.

Ref. to the hubub about copyrights - at the bottom of every page, including the LF page (just below the links to search the LF archive, BTW) -

"© 2000, 2001, 2002 photo.net, All Rights Reserved. "

Brian,

The tone of your overly zealous, "come-on-guys-give-us-a-chance" posts, now seems to echo - "we have it now, and you're not gonna get it from us, cause its ours!"

I can't help but believe that was the intent all along.

Per,

Looks like the new digs come with a different "bent" as it were.

As a community, this forum has always been a place to discuss the attitudes behind photography in general, and large format specifically. That includes, almost by definition, personal opinions.

I hope we have not seen the death of the original forum by this move here.

Matt O.

The 3021 leg set is more than enough for any 4x5, no matter what it

is made out of. Combined with a 3030 head, it is very stable with a

field camera attached. I even use a 3011/3030 combo with a lighweight

field camera with excellent results. Both of these combinations will

handle 11 lbs. without any problems.

Jim,<BR>

Could you elaborate on that? 4 stops between sunlight and shadow is

not so unusual for anywhere. Please explain.

I agree with Kevin. you may WANT a monorail to use in the field,..

and you may THINK you need a lot of movements. But after shooting for

awhile, you will find that you don't. <BR>

The only really useful movement for most field work is tilt, and

nearly all LF cameras offer that in some form or another.<BR>

You said that weight is not so critical as bulk - well, I know of no

monorail that is more compact than a field camera (nor lighter).

I was in the beginning stages of withdrawal, glad to see the site is back up!<BR>

Well, I am off in a few days to do 2 1/2 weeks in Utah/Arizona with me little Tachihara (and Mamiya, and 35, and enough stuff to require a pack mule!).<BR>

I am packing a Grandagon 90 and a Symmar 210, but I wanted something longer than my 12" of bellows would allow, to get up close & friendly with the hoodoos - so I recently purchased a nice old Wollensak 15" telephoto in an Alphax.<BR>

The shutter has just been CLA'd, so I'm not too concerned about that - but I was curious if anyone has had experience with such a beast on an ultra-light camera. <BR>

Am I asking for trouble? <BR>

" I don't know Meeks' work that well, but for Mann it WORKS."<BR>

<BR>

Doesn't work for me. I have had a hard time understanding the

accolades... to me they're just snapshots with an 8x10.

"I noticed that the reciprocity factor doesn't follow a doubling

sequence as do asa/fstops/shutter speeds. " <BR>

<BR>

Michael - <BR>

<BR>

FYI - that is why it is called "reciprosity FAILURE" - <BR>

The relationship between exposure settings (time/aperture)

is "reciprocal" - meaning a step by-step reduction in

one/reciprocating increase in the other (or vise-versa) produces the

same amount of light for exposure.<BR>

Go too far - and the relationship breaks down, and all bets are off -

hence, there is a failure in the reciprocal relationship.<BR>

Johnathan,<BR>

Check yer email.

I hate arguing politics, especially here - but you started it.<BR>

<BR>

For a country boy (by that I do not mean just "not in the city", as

in - midwest agribusiness, no land NOT plowed, "country" - )

I also grew up, and have spent a large part of my adult life in

fairly remote areas of the west (the places you come to on vacation

from whatever mega-lopolis...). In my 50 years I have seen first-hand

the damage (and waste) caused by development and commercialization.

<BR>

I have also heard all the arguments against industrial development

of "sensitive areas". and I do not disagree with most of those

arguments. <BR>

BUT - (you knew there was going to be a BUT.. didn't you!) -<BR>

<BR>

More damage is done in one summer by tourists, photogs, hikers,

bikers, et al. - to the wilderness areas of the mountain west than

could be done in the ANWL in a decade. (and don't even get me started

on snow mobiles, ski resorts, etc.,etc.)<BR>

The wilderness and high country areas of the lower 48 hold an

immensely more diverse (and in sheer numbers of wildlife and foliage,

exponentially greater), varied and fragile biosystem than you will

find on the tundra! <BR>

Yet, how many of you do those things every year? <BR>

Do the posters in L.A., think about the Colorado River when they turn

on that lawn sprinkler? (or why the City of L.A. really needs to

pressure Congress to divert even more water - from the Columbia

River, 1800 miles away?)Do they think about the death of the Salmon

Runs on the Columbia when they order that grilled Salmon at Upscale

Restaurant-of-the-day?<BR>

Do they think about the damage to the environment, air and water

pollution, done every day by their city - by its very existence?

Do you in NY, Boston, Houston, Denver? <BR>

No, because its too close to home. We can't come to grips with the

fact that we are part of the problem. We poison our backyards, yet

scream when someone wants to extract oil from a remote (and in terms

of bio-culture - a desert) area. <BR>

When I worked in New England, there were mass-protests against a

power plant being built in NH. Bostonians (who's demand for ever-

increasing power production was the reason for the plant construction

in the first place)formed an army of protesters - key among them,

Jane Fonda - called the Clam Shell Alliance. Not many from N.H. -<BR>

The locals produced posters and bumper-stickers with a statement that

pretty much sums up my feelings about the ANWL issue -<BR>

"Let the Bastards freeze in the dark!"

I never entirely remove the dark slide - ever.<BR>

Slide it out- leave it in place - snap shutter - slide it in.<BR>

Why would you want to entirely remove it? Seems like a gamble to me.

The WORST ----<BR>

"Anything more than 500 yds from the car just isn't photogenic." <BR>

-Edward Weston

Nathaniel,<BR>

YOUR comments seem to be misplaced, in fact YOU'RE wrong. :)

It's funny.... the folks who are the greatest proponents of digital,

namely the commercial photographers, will be the first victims of the

new technology. They will go the way of the pencil and rule

draftsman, who only 10 years ago was in high demand, but now extinct.

<BR>

Who needs to hire a photographer for the next campaign, when any

pimple faced 16 year old with a few years of photoshop can grab the

Dcam and snap the shot, or more likely create it from scratch right

at the terminal from stock images.<BR>

Good night boys, rest in peace........

Thanks for the info Ellis and co. <BR>

I guess I'll take both holders along and bring the Polaroids too.<BR>

Thanks again.

Is Polaroid Polacolor 100 (type 79) a good fit for exposure/color proofing for Provia 100F and Velvia? <BR>

Latitude acceptable?

Thanks. <BR>

<BR>

I am aware of the difference between the QL and the QC - I was curious

about the model types because I have read a few statements about the

"Japanese" version (or QL II). <BR>

From what I gather, I can also use Polaroid films in the QL ? <BR>

I have a 545i, but as I will be traveling, it would be nice to use

both (polaroid and Provia/Velvia) in the Fuji.<BR>

Get Monaco EZ Color - calibrates your monitor, scanner and printer

all to one standard using standard IT8 targets.

I saw a post here in the archives relating to Fuji Quickload Holder and the possibility of a couple of different models.<BR>

I am intent on buying a Quickload holder for an upcoming trip, and I notice that there is a difference in price between Calumet (129.00) and B&H (104.00) that seems more than a mark-up differencial. B&H does not provide a photo, so I could not compare obvious differences.<BR>

Does anyone know if there are 2 models of Quickload holders? If not, is B&H really 15-20% less? <BR>

<BR>

Jorge -<BR>

<BR>

This question is as valid relating to large format as any of the

million questions that have appeared here regarding darkroom

processes and enlargers. <BR>

Just because you use a wet process does not make your concerns in

that area more relevant (sp?) to LF photography.<BR>

It is, after all, just another aspect of the process.

I agree with John - doing this in an outdoor setting would be much

nicer than sitting around a table.... <BR>

keep me posted as well, I'd be interested.