steve_baggett

Troy, if you want you can send me some test 4x5 you want scanned and I will send it and a CD with the TIFF file back to you. (Don't send anything valuable in case it gets lost in the mail.) If you have a drum scan of something already then you can compare them yourself. Contact me via email if you want me to do this.

I have one and am very pleased with it. However, I've never had a drum scan of one of my negs/trans to compare it with so I can't give you any information on that. I use both Silverfast and Vuescan with it without any problems. A 4x5 scan at 2500DPI produces a file just over 600M. The maximum print size I ever create is 24in x 30in and the resolution and shadow detail are excellent. It is a true 2500DPI scanner on the hi-res strip in the film-scanning drawer (where 2 4x5 films can be placed). It's one big mother of a scanner. Nice film-holder plates for all sizes 35mm to 8x10 but I only use it for 4x5. It has a glass film-holder for 8x10 and can scan that at 1200DPI, but I shudder to think about the size of the TIFF from that. (I don't shoot 8x10.)

The Beseler 45MX will do this also, i.e. the head will pivot up 90-deg for wall projection. Keeping the paper flat is an issue but should be solvable with one of: (1) 2-sided tape (2) 1-sided tape (3) mild gum adhesive strategically placed on the wall (4) magnets over metal strips (5) vacuum easel.

I have the next model "up" (2500f), have used it for about 15 months, and have been very pleased. I've used it with both Silverfast (which comes with the unit) and with VueScan and I am getting good results with both of these and with scanning both negs and trans. On the usenet forums, however, (particularly comp.periphs.scanners) the service and technical support from Microtek is nearly always derided as being terrible. Luckily I've not needed any support or service but I always read the postings with some sense of foreboding.

I have a SV45U and wide-angle fresnel and the fresnel is just placed on "top" of the regular ruled GG, i.e. on the side toward the photographer. I had the same question when I received mine and got this info from Jeff at Badger. This type of placement eliminates any focus shifts. You might have to "bend" the retaining clips to alter their geometry a little (just a little) to prevent too much stress on the 2 screws holding each clip.

I've used one of these for about 2 years now and "won't leave home without it". Excellent piece of kit. It gets in the corners quite well and the tilting feature makes focusing much easier, as you can always "aim" the loupe directly at the lens nodal point and get maximum brightness when using wide angle lenses. The 6x magnification is a little too strong, however, and occasionally causes me to be distracted by Fresnel lines rather than the image. I wish Silvestri would create a 4x version as that would be ideal IMO. The loupe is very compact and fully settable for your particular eye. I recommend the following "modifications" to it. (1) Add some tape to the metal tilting base. This comes in contact with the GG and the tape will prevent any marring or scratching. This should be done with any metal loupe. (2) Once you've set the focus for your particular eye on the GG "frost", place a piece of tape around the focus knob to secure it against the tube to prevent it from turning and requiring re-adjustment. I've used 4 different loupes for GG focusing and this one is far and away the best.

I have an SV45U and can confirm Danny's experience. I've used a 55mm and a 75mm on it without any problems. My 75mm is mounted on a recessed lens board and I don't even have to do the "set back" trick (described in the SV user's guide) with the front standard, i.e. just mount it and go. With the universal bellows you still have a fair amount of movement using the 75mm. With the 55mm I have to use the "set back" trick.

I've noticed the same thing. Fuji NPS is the easiest, followed by 160VC. Provia is a little tougher than E100VS but both are cake compared to TMAX. These are the only readyload/quickload's I've tried. When removing the strips from TMAX, I'm always afraid I will "crease" the film. A couple of times they've torn on me and I left small pieces on the film during processing. No harm was done but I had to remove the pieces after processing (carefully) and re-wash the film because of the remaining stain where the piece of the leader still was. There's no consistency either, as I've had a few boxes of TMAX readyloads that gave no problems.

I found a thin metal (metric) ruler about 1cm wide and cut about 16cm from it and taped it to a metal bracket that runs along the side of the focusing-rail mechanism on my Ebony SV45U. I use it to determine a "delta" for near and far focus points in mm, by observing the position of the edge of a front or rear brace (depening on whether I'm using the front or rear standard to focus) at the near and far focus points, respectively. I take this focus spread value and apply the table below to find the "optimum" f-stop, which comes from the excellent article by <nobr>Q.-Tuan</nobr> Luong found <a href=http://www.largeformatphotography.info/fstop.html>here</a>. I have the table taped to the side of my camera, and I usually stop down a little more than what the tables indicates. The article in the link explains the meaning of "optimum", in this case.<br>

<table border="yes">

<tr><td>D(mm)</td><td>F</td></tr>

<tr><td> 1</td><td>16.6</td></tr>

<tr><td> 2</td><td>22.6</td></tr>

<tr><td> 3</td><td>32.2</td></tr>

<tr><td> 4</td><td>32.6</td></tr>

<tr><td> 5</td><td>32.9</td></tr>

<tr><td> 6</td><td>45.2</td></tr>

<tr><td> 7</td><td>45.4</td></tr>

<tr><td> 8</td><td>45.6</td></tr>

<tr><td> 9</td><td>45.8</td></tr>

<tr><td>10</td><td>64</td></tr>

</table>

(1) When focused at infinity, the lens is as close to the film plane as it will ever be and the bellows extension is the least (most compressed, which can sometimes limit rise/fall/tilt movements of the lens.). As you focus closer, the lens moves away from the film plane.

(2) This depends on what lens and how close you are to the lighthouse. Generally keep the film plane parallel to the lighthouse (preventing the Keystone-effect = leaning effect) and use front rise (and possibly front tilt) to get the image framed properly and everything in focus. But keep the film plane (camera back) parallel with the lighthouse.

(3) You definitely need a book. A proper answer can't be given here. Practice focusing and composing on the ground-glass before going off on a real shoot. Consider getting a Polaroid holder and shoot some Polaroid's to learn the effect of movements. I'm sure you will get much other good advice in this thread.

 

Here are some book reccomendations, but this list is not exhaustive:

 

Using the View Camera - Simmons

The View Camera - Shaman

View Camera Technique - Stroebel (This is a text and reference and I have edition #7. This book is very thorough, but may be too much for a beginner.)

 

Good Luck.

<i>I've often wondered since then whether a snorkel would work well! </i><br><br>

It would probably work but you'd look awfully funny. Might even get arrested, for something. What does work is about 12-14 inches of plastic tubing of 1/4-1/2 ID, from any hardware store. Let it curl downward against your chest, inhale through your nose, and exhale through the tube to keep the GG from fogging under the darkcloth. I tried straws, but can't get enough "wind" through those.

Corey, I sent you an email. Reply here if you don't get it.

Joe, the latent image is not formed by breaking any chemical bonds in the emulsion. The photons are absorbed by the shared electron cloud in the silver halide crystals and, thus, change the electron clouds' quantum mechanical "state" a tiny amount. The state is "higher" in terms of electron energy levels, so it would have a miniscule greater mass (delta-energy divided by c-squared, giving a really tiny number). It is during development when chemical reactions take place, the rate of which varies according to how many crystals have been "altered" and to what degree. I like the question. Enquiring minds want to know.

I'm wondering if there now exists a small slave unit (like a "peanut"

slave) that will trigger a second flash on the main "pop" of a 550EX

flash and *NOT* be triggered by the E-TTL preflash? I know that they

make such slaves for use with "digital" cameras to trigger auxiliary

flashes for them, but I can't seem to find one whose documentation

explicitly states it will work with the Canon pre-flash system. Do

they exist? I also realize I can switch to plain TTL and get around

this, but I really like the "better" metering of E-TTL and don't want

to use a 2nd E-TTL compatible flash, e.g., 420EX or another 550EX. I

have a double flash Kirk macro bracket, but it's so heavy with the

2nd (420EX) flash mounted that my arms "quiver" while focusing after

a few hours of shooting. (I shoot hand-held macro, in the bush.)

What I have in mind is to find an itty-bitty manual flash unit

(taking just 2-AA's, for example) that would be small enough

to "strap" to the big lens hood of my 180L and use as a small fill

flash, by setting it to its lowest power (and covering it with layers

of diffusion material, if needed). I know that mixing E-TTL with non-

E-TTL flash can lead to overexposure, but I'm a big boy and can

handle that with a little experimentation. I'm doing single point

metering and just need a "pinch" of fill flash. I've tried the

alternative of various reflectors mounted on the hood and what not,

but they always seem to scare the dickens out of whatever bug I'm

stalking, causing them to take off. I also don't want to use any

kind of "radio" trigger either, as that would be too expensive. I've

searched the archives here, but can't seem to find a thread that

mentions any particular device like this. If you know of something,

I'd be interested. Other than the options I've already excluded

above, any clever alternative ideas would also be welcome. Thanks in

advance.

I use a Quantum QB1+ with a 550EX and the "cord" you need is MKZ2 for the 550EX. For the Turbo batteries you will need a CZ or CCZ, depending on the model. You can often find these used for a very good price at KEH. See <a href=http://www.quantumbattery.com/battery/compatibility/welcome.html>this link.</a>

It is unlikely that flash could damage wildlife's eyes, after all they evolved to put up with occasional lightning. <a href=http://www.rpphoto.com/howto/hummer/humguide1.htm>This site</a> has all the info you could ever want on photographing hummingbirds using flash.

I've used these, mailed in a regular box, on numerous occasions. They are reusable (ask the lab to return the bag) and cost $0.79 each. They will fold over several times with 4x5, are completely light-tight, and can be taped:

Delta Light Tight Safe-T-Bags with Labels (5-Pack) for Film and Paper

Mfr Catalog # 13510 � B&H Catalog # DESTB $3.95

Kodak Portra VC160 is fairly saturated (and somewhat more contrasty) than other films. (VC stands for "vivid color", I think). Interestingly, Fuji NPS160 is nearly as saturated as VC160 but is not sold as a "saturated" film. It's also a little less contrasty than VC160 and does very well in "mixed" lighting, i.e. mixing tungsten or fluorescent with daylight doesn't give it too great a color cast. NPS160 also seems to have less "long-exposure color shift" than VC160, particularly in the 5-20 second range where I shoot it often. Both of the above come in Ready/Quick-loads. My favorite was Agfa Optima 100, but I'm down to my last partial box (30 sheets or so left) and I don't think it is made in 4x5 any more. (audible sigh) ... There may be others that I haven't tried.

I've not tried the "hood" but I have tried the jeweler's "eyepieces" that attach to your glasses (one side) where you raise/lower them in and out of your line of vision. They usually come with two magnifiers giving you a variable 4x-8x magnification. They work, per se, but I found that it is too difficult to hold my head the correct distance from the GG while also trying to focus, so I reverted to the loupe. The loupe's advantage is that its placement on the GG is what keeps the focusing device's optical distance fixed, and thus reduces the number of variables to contend with to 1 = subject focus. IMO, the loupe is the way to go. Contact me via email, if you like, and I will send the thingy to you to try out and see if it works for you, as I don't use it at all.

I actually went to the link and filled in the blanks. However, in place of real data, I used every vile obscenity that I could arrange into a data item that would cast aspersions on these people and their ancestry (including their mother). It was fun trying to think up nasty names, phrases, addresses, etc. to use in the data fields. It made me feel better, anyway. At least they will have to examine the output from their "hit" to see if they harvested anything useful, and I got a small catharsis out it.

Here's the link for the device Michael was referring to. Attached is the same image from their page.

<br>

http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/ebony.htm#Labelvbell

The MT-24EX will fit the 100mm and 50mm macro lenses and the MPE-65mm macro right out of the box. For other lenses, you must get an adapter (Canon Macrolite) to use, and possibly step rings. The 72C Macrolite adapter will enable the light to fit the 180mmL (72mm). The 58C Macrolite adapter will fit any lens with 58mm threads. For anthing else, you can use a step ring to get to 72mm or 58mm and then use appropriate Macrolite adapter.

I've used both. I started with the Kinesis heavy-duty belt + padded harness & strap system and 4 waist bags. Worked well enough. I then switched to the Lowepro S&F and like it better for the following reasons. I use this "outfit" for macro shooting during long hikes in the boonies, lasting 3-5 hours. The S&F has better shoulder straps and, at the point of convergence on your upper back just below your neck, it spreads the load better. The Kinesis has a flat, hard plastic piece covered with padding at this point and you can "feel" it after a while. I attach a 1.5L Camelback water pouch to my S&F along with 3 other bags containing: Quantum battery, film, small collection of tools, additional body and different lens, and other odds and ends. I have a heavy camera setup (EOS3+180L+Kirk macro bracket+550EX) that I hang from the front of the S&F vest using removable straps anchored on some d-rings. The S&F is more customizable than the Kinesis, having loops and d-rings everwhere for attaching "stuff" figuring out clever ways to spread the load. With my heavy camera load, it also "pinches" my neck less than the Kinesis. The weight of the camera "draws" the shoulder strips toward the center of my chest and presses on both sides of my neck. The S&F is much better about this, forcing most of the load on the shoulders of the "vest" apparatus. As I said before, the S&F is much more "customizable". I've even built myself a a tripod "quiver" (like an arrow quiver) which hangs between my shoulders and attaches over the shoulder harness to some d-rings. The Kinesis gear is good stuff, but the Lowepro is better, at least for how I use it. For my use, I give the Kinesis a 7.5 and the S&F a 9.0, on a scale of 10. I hope this was useful, and good luck.

My experience concurs with Ling. I use the new Kodak Readyload holder with both Readyloads and Quickloads without a problem.

I have a pair of Gen-I goggles (generation-1, the oldest technology) and they work well if you use the little light that is mounted on them that provides enough light and IR for them to function in total darkness. They are useless in a totally darkened darkroom. They will focus down to about 1.5 feet and, when using the aid light, I can see the whole darkroom clearly. Unfortunately, the little aid light also produces a small amount of light in the visible spectrum, i.e., it shows up to the naked eye as a very, very faint red glow. So I was afraid it might "fog" color film and never used them in the darkroom. (I intended using them to aid in loading filmholders, etc., but I decided against it when I discovered the above. I also got better at loading in total darkness.) I've never done a fog test to see if they emit enough red to fog B&W film over a 20-30 minute period. I'll do the test if anyone is really interested. I've got a feeling they might be OK for B&W film. I originally bought them as an aid to night-fishing, so I wasn't really out the money. They work well on the lake.