ruimoraisdesousa

<p>Yes, film for sure!<br>

<strong>6x6</strong> : Hasselblad, Rollei TLR; <strong>6x7</strong> : Corfield WA67, Linhof Rapid Rollex on 4x5 camera; <strong>6x9</strong> : Horseman SW612; <strong>6x12</strong> : Horseman SW612, Horseman 6x12 roll film back on 4x5 camera.<br>

I wish to add, when opportunity arrives, a 6x17 roll film back to 4x5 camera.<br>

(I also shoot 35mm, 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10. Would love to be able to go even larger...).<br>

Although I also use it (not much...), digital is not atractting to me. Doesn't make my heart throb!<br>

Cheers,<br>

Rui<br>

<a href="http://ruimoraisdesousa.blogspot.com/">AL-MOST-LY PHOTOGRAPHY</a></p>

<p>A good working Rolleiflex TLR is at least so capable of producing high quality images as a Hasselblad!<br>

Of course, the Rollei has more limitations (lack of lens interchangeability...), but also some serious advantages (silent shutter, size, usually lower price...).<br>

Both share fantastic optics and great engineering.<br>

I have been using both brands for decades with very satisfying results.<br>

I also used a Mamiya C 330 for some time, many years ago, but I sold it. A very capable camera, but too bulcky for my taste...<br>

Last end, it is the photographer who takes more responsability for the success or failure of an image.<br>

Cameras are just tools.<br>

Cheers,<br>

Rui Morais de Sousa<br>

<a href="http://ruimoraisdesousa.blogspot.com/">AL-MOST-LY PHOTOGRAPHY</a></p><div></div>

<p>A good working Rolleiflex TLR is at least so capable of producing high quality images as a Hasselblad!<br>

Of course, the Rollei has more limitations (lack of lens interchangeability...), but also some serious advantages (silent shutter, size, usually lower price...).<br>

Both share fantastic optics and great engineering.<br>

I have been using both brands for decades with very satisfying results.<br>

I also used a Mamiya C 330 for some time, many years ago, but I sold it. A very capable camera, but too bulcky for my taste...<br>

Last end, it is the photographer who takes more responsability for the success or failure of an image.<br>

Cameras are just tools.<br>

Cheers,<br>

Rui Morais de Sousa<br>

<a href="http://ruimoraisdesousa.blogspot.com/">AL-MOST-LY PHOTOGRAPHY</a></p>

<p>Hi Christian,</p>

<p>It is already an older post, but I only saw it now...</p>

<p>Yes, I can give you some information and show you some photographs of the Corfield and even some made with a Corfield, as it happens to be one of my working cameras.</p>

<p>If you wish to do so, please take a look in my blog, AL-MOST-LY PHOTOGRAPHY.</p>

<p>Here is the link: <a href="http://ruimoraisdesousa.blogspot.com/">ruimoraisdesousa.blogspot.com</a></p>

<p>Greetings,</p>

<p>Rui</p><div></div>

<p>Each and every morning, I make me a powder coffee. It's fast and tastes acceptable.<br>

Does that makes a coffee expert out of me? Can I say that I make a phantastic coffee, just because I can put two spoons of powder in the cup and pour some hot water over it?<br>

Just because I can print a picture on a inkjet, I am not necessarly a master printer, or?<br>

Just because I can correct in some seconds a photograph in my computer, doesn't make me a master photographer, or?<br>

Yes, I agree with Mr. Andre Noble: digital processing is (can be) very tedious. Sure, you need to master it, but it still is tedious. As working in a wet darkroom can be tedious for sure.<br>

I think that only when you feel that you are producing something special, and only then, that boredom can fully disappear.<br>

My point hier, is that we tend to produce too much visual crap, and THAT makes it boring.<br>

We should try to be more selective and be conscient that not everything we produce deserves special attention. And we should be modest enough to understand that just because we can do some things, we are not entitled to think that we master them.<br>

No matter wich method we choose (analog, digital or hybrid), we all produce not so much interesting images. We should learn to practice self criticism and only save (or show what we think to be) the best part.<br>

Than, no matter in wich art from "darkroom" we choose to work, we will only have to deal with a few interesting images. That will make much more fun and will be much more rewarding.<br>

Greetings, <a href="http://ruimoraisdesousa.blogspot.com/">Rui</a></p><div></div>

<p>Thank you very much Frank.<br>

Yes, I try...<br>

If you wish click on the link below. There are some more.<br>

Hope you enjoy.<br>

<a href="http://ruimoraisdesousa.blogspot.com/">Rui</a></p><div></div>

<p>Sorry, I saw that I didn't make the links correctly, so I try again: <a href="http://www.fotoimpex.de/">Fotoimpex</a><br>

<a href="http://ruimoraisdesousa.blogspot.com/">Rui</a></p><div></div>

<p>Hello everybody everywhere,<br>

Here in Portugal it is getting harder and harder to do Large Format photography. The last time I tried to order some 8x10 inches color transparency film from Kodak, I was told that I would need to order ten boxes (100 sheet), and that would cost me 1500 euros (plus VAT)! My question: how much would I need to charge my client for that reproduction of his painting? <br>

In black and white, the situation doesn't look better. The last 35mm Tri-X I bought (yes, I shoot a lot of formats: 35mm, 6x6, 6x7, 6x9, 6x12, 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10), cost me eight (8) euros each!<br>

So I started looking for alternatives and decided to try <a href="../www.fotoimpex.de/">Fotoimpex</a> in Berlin. I ordered some 5x7 inches Adox film and some 8x10 inches Fomapan film. The quality of the service was very good, and I was very pleased with the quality of the material (They also have odd and ULF sizes!). The tonality of the negatives looks very good, with very good shadow detail and fine highlights. I can even say that I found there what I was missing in T-Max.<br>

I was specially very amazed about Fomapan: In the 80's I had tried some and found it to be crap. Now this is really another stuff, and I find the film capable of very good results (If you wish, you can see some photographs in ruimoraisdesousa.blogspot.com, under the post: My hometown seen with a 8x10 inches camera). Fotoimpex also have a lot of other interesting items for black and white film users, and I also like their Adolux ATM 49 developer.<br>

What's more: they send only one pack of film, you don't need to buy 10 boxes. Prices are also very acceptable.<br>

Guess what? Kodak won't see my money very soon again (maybe except for Tri-X and D-76, which I love), and my Gandolfi 8x10 won't be collecting dust.<br>

Give a look at their site. I think you won't regret it!<br>

Now about a digital back for LF: all this $1.000's for a digital back? Are you kidding? I struggle to survive and be able to pay the rent of my studio!... With all this crisis, I am afraid that I will have to shut the door...<br>

Besides: I do LF (and other film-formats) because I LOVE IT!<br>

Please, don't take that away from me!<br>

Have a nice time,<br>

<a href="ruimoraisdesousa.blogspot.com">Rui</a></p>

<div></div>

<div></div>

Hi again. An example to show that I also use digital...<div></div>

Hello Bob. Maybe you really should try that old Voigtländer. I don't know that modell, but I think that you probably will get amazed with the results. I defenitively more and more think, that new or newer is not always better. A Hasselblad is for sure a good choice, but keep an eye on a good Rolleiflex TLR, if that kind of camera coul have some appeal for you. If you can live only with a lens, is a very fine instrument capable of extremelly good results (in my opinion, maybe even better than Hassi, if also equiped with a Planar (Maybe because of the absence of mirror vibration?). Also (relatively) light and very silent. With all this digital fobia, there is a lot of good, or even extremelly good, analogic used equipment out there, for a really interesting price. Come on people, wake up! Use it! As far as I am concerned, I will not think of trading my 53 year old Leica M3 for anything else just for the sake of beeing digital, new, modern, or whatever. She is still so young and pretty...After all, if you do analogic and digital, you can enjoy the best of both. You don't need to exclude a part of the fun. Rui<div></div>

Hello Patrick. I have been using Adox CHS 100 in 5x7" and Fomapan 100 in 8x10" (the new films from Foma seem to be much better than the old stuff they were selling in the 80's!) for the last couple of weeks, and I must say that I am very pleased with the results. I must admit that I didn't enlarge or contact any negative so far (or even scanned), but they look really beautiful. I think they will have the kind of look you wish. I developed them myself in Kodak D-76 diluted 1+1 (my "standard" developer), and I experimented with Adox ATM 49 diluted 1+1 and 1+2. I had never tried it before, but I surelly will be using it in the future. I love(d) Kodak Tri-X (somehow the new generation also has lost something...), specially for street shooting with a Leica or so, but I never really enjoyed T-Max films that much. For sure you can make phantastic photographs with it, but they usually tend to lack some "soul". If it is good tonalities, good shadow detail and character you're looking for, you really should try Adox. You even can get them much cheaper than Kodak films in a lot of different and hard to find formats. Fotoimpex in Germany have a good service. try them. For myself, I think I will never buy Kodak again, except for maybe some Tri-X. Greetings, Rui

P.S.: If I get to scan some in the next days, I will post a couple of examples.<div></div>

Hello everybody,

I still love my old Leicas-M, Rolleiflex 35mm, Nikon F and FM, Canon EOS-1n, Hasselblad 500 C/M, TLR Rolleiflex 3,5F, Corfield 67WA, Horseman 612, Sinar F2, Gandolfi Variant 4x5", Gandolfi 8x10", plus all the excellent lenses I use with them (no cheap plastic, no need to correct in Photoshop), all that beautiful sounding names that represent optical excellence like Planar, Sonnar, Distagon, Summicron, Tele-Elmarit, Apo-Ronar, Apo-Symmar, Super-Angulon, Sironar, G-Claron, etc., etc. Should I throw them all away just because they are no more "IN"? Do I discard them just because a profit - oriented industry is clever enough (or not) to put a new modell out every three months with silly features I don't need and I don't care about? NO WAY!!! There are too many beatiful films out there. Some of them even (relatively) cheap and beatifull, like Adox CHS, or the new generation of Fomapan (see Fotoimpex, Germany). I also love my self-made BW!

Please don't understand me badly. I also use a Canon digital (some of the L-lenses are also very good), I also use a Epson scanner, I also use an Ink-jet printer... They all can do beatiful things, for sure.

But guess what?: my heart surelly gets much more warmed by the old materials, and even more by the build-quality of my old equipment. It just was made to work for decades. It doesn' outdate. Capable of top results after all these years.

The image is what really counts. How you get there is surelly more than half of the fun.Enjoy and have passion and commitment! Greetings, Rui

Hello Vib,Vib

I hope that in the meantime you are getting better used to your new Leica. It will never be always perfect, it will let you sometimes down, nothing is perfect. But it surelly is a fine camera, with wonderful lenses. My older Leica (an M3 doublestroke) is 53 years old and still looks young and does great photographs, at least when I am inspired and control her to do so. It seems that many people here in this forum think that they know everything and they are better than everyone else. Maybe because they have auto-everything cameras that do all the "thinking" for them? Maybe because they post hundreds of (maybe uninteresting?) pictures on their gallerys... Maybe when they started picking up a camera they were allready geniuses? Yes, the world is not everywhere equal, some are richer, some are poorer, some are wiser and some are not so wise. But in my experience (I´m doing photography for some decades now, from 35mm all the way up to 8x10inches), I often found out that the "big throats", the "better-knowers", are usually the most incompetent and less interesting people to know. I gladly avoid crossing their way, and I hope they don't cross mine.

So read up attentively the people who gave (give) you good and interesting answers and advises, and just skip all the other verbal garbage. Their photography is maybe not better.

Hope you are happy shooting with your Leica, learning from your mistakes like I still learn from mine, and surelly your photography will make a better person out of you, with better awareness of what surrounds you.

Let the others talk and go ahead shooting...

My best wishes and many greetings from Portugal. Rui<div></div>

E para não abusar, só mais uma tb do mesmo dia. Tem piada, reparo que são as três de 1983. Estou a ficar velho. Mas continuo a fotografar, claro. Tenho até andado a desempoeirar algum equipamento. Nas últimas semanas tenho usado de td um pouco: Leica, Rollei 35mm (+ Zeiss Planar+Sonnar+Distagon), (até uma velha Exakta dos anos sessenta),etc., etc. O que me tem dado mais gozo, no entanto, tem sido fazer uns belos negativos P/B em 13x18 e 20x25 (cm, entenda-se...).

Por enquanto aqui fica a Leica de novo.

Abraço, Rui<div></div>

Rui,

Já era altura de mandar uma com Leica...

Neste caso a minha "novinha" de 1978...<div></div>

Ola novamente, de facto não será fácil encontrares-me na net, a não ser relacionado com fotografia e publicações

de arquitectura. A página que tinha da minha editora White & Blue (alguns exemplos"Álvaro Siza - Museu de

Serralves", "Souto de Moura - Santa Maria do Bouro") cancelei-a há uns tempos, para a renovar. Agora vejo que

provávelmente vou ter de fechar a editora, pois os tempos estão complicados, os clientes não pagam e o fisco come

tudo. Ainda fiz um

perfil recentemente no my space mas aborreci-me daquilo e fechei tb. Penso começar em breve um blog... É uma seca

scannisar negativos, mas vamos ver.

Que tal a FM2? Eu tenho uma FM que herdei dum amigo e gosto, embora não seja própriamente silenciosa. O problema

é que considero as objectivas da Nikon mt inconsistentes: umas são óptimas, outras não me convencem. A minha

preferida é a 2,5/105mm, manual (não tenho experiência autofocus com Nikon, optei por Canon).

Como estás a pensar fazer com as revelações? Na minha opinião, P/B só vale a pena se for bem feito, o que média

geral significa ser revelado/ampliado pelo próprio.

Vou tentar juntar mais uma ou duas imagens relativas ao teu tema.

Abraço, Rui<div></div>

Ola Rui novamente,

Antes de mais, desculpa a minha imagem gigantesca (estava a fotografar o edifício da Assembleia). A intenção não era "dar nas vistas": eu é que sou nabo nestas coisas de computadores e net, pensei que a imagem fosse ficar pequenina como as outras, nem me preocupei com o tamanho...).

Ainda quanto à Leica: não há nada como pegar numa (e usar, claro), para se sentir a diferença. É algo um pouco difícil de definir. Parece que foi feita para estar na mão, para ser um prolongamento dela. É directa e simples. Especialmente as mais antigas têm um visor "limpo", sem lixo visual. Convidam a fotografar...

Se vieres aqui para os lados de Montemor-o-Novo (onde vivo actualmente), e te apetecer, diz alguma coisa. Não me importo de te deixar experimentar "ao vivo". Sempre é diferente de estar a olhar para uma numa loja...

O único problema actual da Leica, na minha opinião, é de se ter tornado numa marca (quase exclusivamente) feita a pensar em clientes ricos que, média geral, pouco têm a ver com fotografia. Passou a ser um objecto de status, de colecção, de investimento. Que pena e que vergonha...

Eu pessoalmente nunca experimentei nenhuma, mas penso que uma boa alternativa, e bem mais económica, possam ser as Voigtländer / Cosina. Pelo menos a nível de objectivas dá-me a sensação de serem mt boas e estarem próximas da filosofia original da Leica. Uma alternativa ainda, certamente tb interessante, seria algo a nível de preço intermédio: a Zeiss Ikon, com as suas excepcionais Biogon, Distagon, Planar etc. Em qualidade óptica certamente não inferiores à Leica. (Não faço idéia se existem por cá, e ponho em dúvida que haja um serviço minímamente decente. Já a Contax era uma tristeza com uma porcaria de representante).

Bem, seja qual for a escolha que faças, não deixarás certamente de continuar a fazer imagens muito interessantes. Na realidade a câmara é de facto secundária.

um abraço, Rui<div></div>

Olá Rui,

Vi as tuas imagens e apenas te posso responder: elas MERECEM uma LEICA - M! Não me refiro aqueles modelos mais ou menos ridículos para coleccionador que valem fortunas e que são fabricados para estarem em vitrines...Também não me refiro aquelas objectivas cheias de especificações (Apo, Aspheric, etc, etc.). Se não te podes dar ao luxo duma M6, procura uma mais velhinha em bom estado. Na minha opinião uma M2 (normalmente as mais baratas) com uma Summicron 35mm (muito pequena, confortável e discreta, óbviamente com resultados excelentes), e uma Tele-Elmarit 2,8/90mm (tb. muito compacta) seriam um excelente começo (e dos mais "económicos" a nível de Leica). Tem em atenção, no entanto, que qq destes modelos mais antigos (excepto a M 5 e a CL, casos um pouco à parte) não possuem fotómetro incorporado. Não te deixes assustar pela idade dos aparelhos. Assumindo que foram bem estimadas e se encontram em bom estado, foram feitas para durar e aguentar. Para te dar uma idéia: a minha Leica (refiro-me aos corpos) mais "nova" é de 1978! (Uma M 4 - 2). A minha "velhinha" (M3) tem exactamente a minha idade, ou seja 53 anos. Tomara eu estar tão "bonitinho" e em forma como ela... Para teres uma melhor idéia dos vários modelos, preços etc., aconselho-te a dar uma vista de olhos nuns sujeitos austríacos que vendem muito material usado: www.leicashop.com. A página é excelente, cheia de (boas) fotografias dos aparelhos, etc. Eu mandei vir há pouco tempo uma 400mm para a EOS e o serviço não podia ter sido melhor. Recebi tudo muito bem empacotado e a objectiva não teria melhor aspecto se tivesse saído da fábrica. Caixa original, papéis, etc. Preciso de me esforçar muito para detectar marcas de uso! Parecem-me ser bastante sérios. E quanto a Leicas, têm uma colecção de SONHO...

Outra hipótese interessante, na minha opinião, seria usares uma Rolleiflex TLR... (Ou outro modelo qq de obturador central, mas eu só posso falar pela Rollei. Com uma Planar, garanto-te que não ficam nada atrás de uma Hasselblad no que toca a qualidade de imagem (Não estou a falar de cor, tenho os dois modelos). E são SUPER-SILENCIOSAS! Claro, ficas sujeito a uma única objectiva...

Bem, a minha resposta já vai longa, mas fica a saber que foi a qualidade e o estilo das tuas imagens que me levaram a responder à tua pergunta (já agora: foi a primeira vez que o fiz...).

Fica à vontade para perguntar mais alguma coisa, se assim o desejares.Dispõe sempre.

Rui Morais de Sousa

P.S.: Outra vantagem da Leica: o mecanico do representante (o Sr. Nunes) é deveras competente e consciencioso, além de uma excelente pessoa. Para quem usa equipamentos com algumas décadas em cima, é deveras reconfortante saber que estão bem entregues quando precisam de uma revisão.<div></div>