uimike

<p>Lex - thanks for the suggestions. I will develop the HP5+ in Diafine, using the exact same procedure I did for the TX400 - at least, I can say I have all factors controlled :-)<br>

Of course, HP5 (or different films, for that matter) could loose latent image at a different rate - is that a known thing?<br>

I will _definitely_ do what you suggested, bracketing from 200-3200, and doing this for a variety of scene lighting (contrasty, flat, high-key, etc)... FUN!<br>

I'll post the results here.<br>

Lex, everyone - I appreciate your help!</p>

<p>Lex - I am making a printout of what you posted for my home office wall - what a great infonugget!<br>

So what happened to me was:<br>

TX400 underexposed (@1600) and (1 yr) loss of latent image shade detail. So if it had been exposed say at @500-800 and processed pronto (in Diafine) I would have gotten a more "compensated" development. <br>

Is that correct?<br>

Also, I now have a 2nd roll, shot at that time, except this is HP5+ shot @1600, on a Pentax PZ-1p I picked up for a song from KEH (I am starting to feel like the sorcerer's apprentice he he, having barely a clue of what I'm doing)<br>

How would I process that - I was about to do it in Diafine again (before the thread) but obviously I will get the same, perhaps worse :-)<br>

Michael Ging mentioned Edwal FG7 - perhaps?</p>

<p>Hi all, thanks for the great comments. <br>

Lex: Bingo! Film was exposed a year ago. Enough to make it loose 1/2 - 1 stop?</p>

<p>@Michael Ging: I will try the Edwal FG7 1:15 + 1 film can of Na2SO3.<br>

My Diafine was as per box instructions, except for the 4+4 minutes - but I was told Diafine timing was not crucial... </p>

<p>Hey thanks for the comments all!<br>

I thought "true" Tri-X speed in Diafine was 1600 - but now I'm reading that it could be more like 1000 - 1250. That would cause it to be underexposed, plus if the scenes are a bit contrasty, so that would explain what I get?<br>

Len: tx for the suggestion, here we go: <a href="http://db.tt/ah5D4CJA">Photo 1, I like the detail on the hair</a>, <a href="http://db.tt/RLYCbnUh">LAX</a><br>

Both pp in LR4 - exposure boosted<br>

mike</p>

<p>Hi all, I am back to B&W processing after _many_ years. I am trying different films, developers just for fun - I know I should be focusing on a few, or maybe just one combination.<br>

My first Tri-X / Diafine combination is a bit odd.<br>

I exposed @1600 (as per recs) on my Hexar AF, souped in Diafine 4+4. Temp was 71 F. It looks a lot different from what I usually got with D-76 and others in the past. When I scan it, there seems to be less detail in the shadows than I'd expect, and grain seems a bit to pronounced (Nikon 5000).<br>

Here's a picture of the <a href="http://db.tt/W2dW5dd6">negatives<br /></a><br>

would anyone care to comment on whether I might have underexposed them, or something else I did wrong? The pic of the negs is +2 stops trying to match what I experienced at the light table.</p>

<p>Many tx!</p>

<p><<Robert Johnston posted...>></p>

<p>Robert, great comment. Not that long ago, people would get irked if you asked, and tell you to go RTFM. Nowadays, it seems it is getting more and more acceptable to just ask - I do think net users are getting more cooperative? Well, depends on the forum. This one is great.<br>

Anyways, Help and manuals were always iffy. Like roadmaps. That's why our spouses would beg us to stop and ask for directions :-)<br>

m.</p>

<p>This is gotta be one of the most puzzling behaviors in Lightroom, but I figured it out (by chance). Select a corner of your crop frame, drag to make it smaller and smaller. At some point it will just flip from landscape to portrait, and _then_ you can drag again to enlarge the crop frame _in portrait mode-.</p>

<p>try it...</p>

<p>mike</p>

<p>John,<br>

I've used Leitax (David Llado) on both a 50 Summicron and a 60mm Macro Elmarit - on a K20D. I am tremendously happy with the results. I've also adapted Contax lenses using Leitax adapters.<br>

I can tell you the following: 1) the lenses are amazing, in different ways. My Contax T 85mm f/2.8 can pull micro detail I've never seen from the Pentax lenses I have or tried (I did not try the 85mm f/1.8 or the FA 31mm though), and gives me very pleasing portraits as well. I am right now adapting a Contax T 35mm f/2.8, and will try the 28mm later. The color on both Leica lenses is stunning, and the out-of-focus rendering of the Elmarit Macro is surreal. Both generate that 3D effect when wide open.<br>

Focusing is variable: can be quite hard on wider lenses, esp. on more distant subjects and if hand-held. The issue is that you may even focus wide open, but when you step down to the aperture you want, you may not nail the focus. Wide opoen, of course, DOF is quite narrow...<br>

Focusing with the lenses stopped down is hard, esp. on the Contax 85mm and the Elmarit. AND, I _am_ using both a Katz-Eye AND a viewfinder magnifier (Pentax). That said, my vision is not that good (age :) - so your mileage will vary.<br>

So, in general, I'd say it has been fun to use these great (now affordable) lenses, built in a way we don't see anymore, use them wide open hand-held, 200-400 ASA on sunny days, 400-800 ASA under more overcast conditions, or use them with a tripod - then you can focus carefully, stop down, etc.<br>

David's adapters are fabulous, the instructions are clear to follow, he is a class provider. On the pricey side, but you get more than you paid for.<br>

I am hedging currently: I carry my Leicas and Contaxes, plus a Pentax 50mm FA. I may add a 31mm, then I'll be able to have the freedom to shoot what I want the way I need it depending on the circumstances (hand, street x slower, tripod for details)</p>

<p>hth,</p>

<p>mike c</p>

<p>Select the folder "SET" - or whatever name it is, the "Save Actions..." option in the palette menu will enable. Keep in mind that you can drag actions from other sets to the one you are saving.</p>

<p>mike c</p>

Also,

Jordi Bas Foto, down the street...

http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&q=fotografia&near=Barcelona,+Spain&fb=1&sa=X&oi=local_group&resnum=1&ct=image

Both 1 minute from Plaça Catalunya (down Carrer Pelai)

email got all squished together...

Casanova Foto

http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&q=fotografia&near=Barcelona,+Spain&fb=1&lr=lang_ca|lang_en|lang_fr|lang_de|lang_pt|lang_es&hl=en&latlng=41385797,2166135,1545413535285039841&ei=pBFwSI3hI5v2iwOW_6TWBg&cd=2

http://www.casanovafoto.com/

http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&q=fotografia&near=Barcelona,+Spain&fb=1&lr=lang_ca|lang_en|lang_fr|lang_de|lang_pt|lang_es&hl=en&latlng=41385797,2166135,1545413535285039841&ei=pBFwSI3hI5v2iwOW_6TWBg&cd=2

I bought my cameras, lenses, copy stand, etc, etc there. Nice used dept too, across the street

yeah, I agree with Roland that the 2nd photo is more typical of the sharpness. The 1st one,

though, I am not sure it is in focus, though.

I've been getting the best results around F/5.6 - F/8, with careful focusing and tripod. I

like mine very much.

Try and take a few more pics, at different apertures, on a tripod if you can, and under

different lighting conditions. Also, shoot a larger variety of subjects (like, some flowers,

buildings, pets, etc) - and then I will be able to tell you more about how it compares to

mine.

As soon as I figure out how, I could post a couple of pics, too.

mike

Jiri,

I've got one (amazingly sharp) and the front element rotates (as last poster commented, filter

seat is fixed though).

mike