tim_emeritz

<p>Does anyone know if there are reducing backs or adapters for 3.25x4.25 sheet film for 4x5 backs? Any suggestions for accomplishing the same result through different means are appreciated, too.</p>

<p>I have never really shot polaroid film other than their 4x5 sheets (55, 64T). I have a box polapan 664 and some type of polaroid color film (possibly 669?) all of which expired in 2004. I have a polaroid 330 land camera (it has never been used at all) that I am trying to shoot this film with.<br>

<br />Now, battery in camera; film loaded; shutter cocked; shutter release depressed; shutter "clicks"; film pulled; chemicals released and sits to develop; peel film and...nothing. All the sheets I have exposed are a dark purple.<br>

<br />Is it just a matter of shooting nearly 10-year-expired polaroid film? Possible camera issues? Any thoughts, advice, troubleshooting would be greatly appreciated.</p>

<p>if you don't mind going totally manual i highly recommend the nikkor 55mm 2.8 micro lens. definitely one of the best lenses i've ever used. <a href="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/micronikkor/55mmmicro.htm">http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/micronikkor/55mmmicro.htm</a></p>

<p>i suppose i ought to include the image in its entirety.</p><div></div>

<p>2nd image: rodinal 1:100 stand development for 5.5 hours (sorry about the dust)</p><div></div>

<p>2400ppi crop</p><div></div>

<p>well, the picture is not so good, but the effect is what's important...metered @ 12800iso f64 exposed for 4 seconds.<br>

1st image: xtol 1:3 stand development for 75min (needed slightly more time)</p>

 

<p>well, damnit. lex you are completely correct. i was supposed to meter with f45 and change it to f64 and i clearly did it the opposite way. thank you for catching that and sorry for the false advertising. i WILL, however, be redoing this process (correctly this time...*smacks head*) and will post the new results after.</p>

<p>it was taken in a studio with two strobes, both rigged with umbrellas. when i metered, i was metering for 6400iso because it's as high as my meter goes, and just adjusted accordingly after.</p>

<p>i had two sets of 12 shots, from different days of shooting (24 total), that all came out (on the film), but the tank i used to develop in apparently leaked light (it wasn't mine) and this is the ONLY image that came out without issue. however, i can say that, given properly functioning equipment, it is indeed possible to replicate the results.</p>

<p>lex: this one was shot at f45/125th with a sync cord metered reading of f64/125th.<br /> lynn: i don't shoot hp5 too often. when i push film, i tend to like tri-x (when you want grain, you have it), but the hp5 is all i had around. i was thinking of using xtol because it has been my experience that the shadow details hold up somewhat better with xtol (as compared to d-76), especially in low-light and high contrast situations (the latter of which i thought would be the case).</p>

<p>full res (2400ppi) crop</p><div></div>

<p>thank you for all the responses. i have gone ahead and tried it out and they seemed to come out alright. i knew that they would have an extremely high grain (even on 4x5), but they held up pretty well, considering.</p>

<p>(tech info: hp5+ @ 12800 stand developed in stock d-76 for 60 minutes)</p><div></div>

<p>crazy? perhaps. but has anyone ever tried it? in xtol, you say? any suggestions are appreciated. thanks.</p>

<p>you may be cross contaminating chemicals (bleach and selenium) causing an undesired outcome. not sure, but it seems possible.</p>

<p>i usually use xtol, but i have run out and only have microdol-x (which i have used and liked a lot). i have used both fp4+ and microdol before, but never in conjunction with one another. this is [mostly] going to be for 8x10 and some 4x5 and 5x7 film. any suggestions on dilutions (massive dev chart says stock and 1:3), times, agitation methods, anything pertinent would be appreciated. thanks.</p>

<p>stephane and michael, i tried both suggestions and it works perfectly again. thank you both so much.</p>

<p>to preface: i have some experience working with a v750 and other earlier/lesser scanners, but i've never run into this problem before.</p>

<p>i just bought an epson v700 scanner and am having some problems when scanning film negatives. i have scanned some negatives - with success - already, but for some reason the most recent scans are coming out with lines across the whole surface, in both the previews and the scans (like a really bad photo copy).</p>

<p>reflective scanning works just fine. i've tried with multiple negatives, to no avail, and have no idea what the problem may be. any advice is greatly appreciated. thanks.</p>

<p>i have used this combination on efke 25 and ilford fp4+ (both films with both 4x5 and 5x7) and i love what came out. i have found that you want to use slightly less agitation than normal when using this developer combination. this is especially true with fp4. the films won't get blocked up to a point of uselessness, but they become significantly more difficult to print with (lots of burning).<br>

<br /> i love this combination. i don't really know much about why he was mixing the two developers, but i'm glad he did.</p>

<p>to answer above, in this case it's xtol 1:4 and rodinal 1:200 (100ml stock: 400ml water and 2.5ml rodinal concentrate: 500ml water)</p>

<p>xtol 1:1 @ 68F for 10.5min or a combination of xtol and rodinal (sorry, i can't find my notes on the exact formula i used, but if i come across them, i'll post it for you) have worked out very well for me in the past when using 4x5 and 5x7.</p>

<p>to begin, i know that there have been other postings about this, but i couldn't find any that quite answered my questions.</p>

<p>i haven't ever used this process, but i am very interested in it (i will be probably only be using this for large format negatives). i have read that hd developed negatives - unlike other pyro processes - can be used for both silver and alternative processes. has anyone here ever used this process specifically for silver printing? any comments?</p>

<p>i am really just looking for information and personal experiences with pyrocat hd: what kind of film(s) did you use? how did you process it (tray, dip and dunk, jobo, etc)? how does it compare with a developer like x-tol?</p>

<p>any information/comments/suggestions are welcome and appreciated. thanks</p>

<p>for 35mm manual focus cameras, go with a nikon (i have an fm2 and i love it) i used to shoot on an fe2 and have used an f3 and i have NEVER been let down. nikkor lenses are pretty good (although, i personally don't like the g-series).</p>

<p>if you want to go the medium format route (and you should at least look into it), a bronica etrsi or mamiya 1000s would be my recommendations for 6x4.5 (645). if you want to shoot square (6x6) rolleiflex (NOT rolleicord) - albeit a tlr system - is the way to go, no question about it. that said, you should decide if you want an old model or a newer (marked as 'rollei') 6000 series, all of which are slr cameras (i like the 6008). if you are trying to go larger, while still remaining in the realm of medium format, the mamiya rz67 (6x7) is a great cameras, but they may take a second to learn what everything on it does (once you do, you're good to go).</p>

<p>if you want to go all out, there are some (not many) large format slr cameras. there's a graphlex 4x5 slr that works very well, but is massive in comparrison. gowland makes a 4x5 tlr camera (i've never used one), but they seem to be targeted for people who really love tlr's and want to shoot larger negatives.</p>

<p>as for film, plus-x is hands-down my favorite film of all time. any non-delta (t-grain) ilford films (pan-f, fp4+, hp5+) are great, for certain applications, tri-x is still a really good, very flexible film and lastly, efke 25. sometimes you'll run into issues with the coating on efke's film, but when all the stars are aligned, it competes with the best of them and costs half as much. i kind of like the imperfections (sometimes) and i would suggest trying it out at least once.</p>

<p>if the camera is too small, too bulky, too heavy, too light, too anything...you're not going to be happy with it and THAT is going to be your biggest set-back.</p>

<p>in the end, it really comes down to a couple key elements: 1) what format/ratio do you find most appealing and conducive to the work you do; 2) what are you hoping to do with the images (enlargements, projections, light boxes, etc); 3) how does the equipment feel while you're working.</p>

<p>hope this helps. good luck.</p>

<p>i have tried this before on an omega d2 with a 135 and a glassless carrier and was able to get some of the edges in after i had filed it out. obviously, the more filing you do, the more you'll see, but you won't be able to get completely "full frame."</p>

<p>maybe your answer lies in using a completely glass "carrier" system (one normal glass, one anti-newton glass) with the negative just sandwiched between and no metal to get in the way? ...maybe i'll try that.</p>

<p>good luck.</p>

<p>i'm starting to shoot 8x10 and i know that there are a number of variables that come into play (moreso than in 4x5 or 5x7). i'm trying to get a handle on exposure compensation and bellows factors, before i really start tackling everything else.<br>

i'm currently using a sironar-n 210mm (which barely, but surprisingly, covers everything) and i will have some access to a 300mm symmar.<br>

any advice is appreciated. thanks.</p>

i just started using 4x5 efke 25 after a long stretch of fp4 and hp5 with d76

(stock and 1:1). i love the efke and have been developing in xtol (stock and

1:3), but i would like to try and raise the contrast without increasing grain

size (as with d76 stock). any advice?