areliano_decotentin

<p>John- can you share some before/after pictures to give me an idea whether that is indeed the problem I'm having?? many thanks</p>

<p>Steve - thanks much for the word on scan cafe - I certainly can't wait two months! There are tons of places in NYC, just looking for a known entity that delivers the goods at the lowest price. Print Space on 19th is a good value at $4.50 / roll 120 c41 processing, for example...</p>

<p>Four or five bucks a scan seems to be what people charge, so it's all relative.I'd be wary of scratches happening by mail order but maybe scan cafe is worth a try.<br>

I'm not a professional but the results from the Epson just look very poor for me. It seems to defeat the purpose of shooting medium format when, essentially, it has to go through a rather bad digital "camera". Could send you examples but I'm sure you can find many on flikr. Seems not sharp, although I tried lowering/raising the slide...<br>

I want to get professional scans of my few good shots.</p>

<p>Hi<br>

There's an old thread out there but wanted to ask again: recommendations for inexpensive (but better than some flatbed) scanning of negs medium format in NYC? I found PrintSpace on 19th which has DIY machines for $50 hour. Any suggestions? I'm ready to throw my epson v500 out the window, if anyone wants to catch...</p>

<p>When I used to do audio engineering, entire control rooms were left on, permanently, forever. Something about turning electronic components off and on being bad because the initial power up gives a burst of voltage and that's where most of the "wear" on electronics happens... in layman's terms...</p>

<p>These days having the chutzpah to call someone on the phone means something. I mean, she could have just posted some self-righteous sarcastic comments on a forum on the internet, hiding behind a level of anonymity...<br>

Photography can be a business, but you're earning money<em> for </em> something: to live enjoyably on this planet of people right? Or is that just me. Some of these wheeler-dealer comments are offputting for that reason.</p>

<p>heading out of snowville tomorrow and need to pick up a bunch of 120 portra nc - cheapest place in town is??</p>

<p>True as noted above, I have done a lot of "video" at 3fps on my d40, and have put more than 40k clicks on it in 11 months. To get some perspective, the one lens I use is (slightly) older than me and will go for decades to come - the d40 is just a sensor with a shelf life of a couple years. Photography is just a piece of glass and a piece of "film" right? How much is the minimum I could have spent on forty thousand exposures of film...</p>

<p>I would be looking to pick up 120 film and get c41 processed in a day or two - I'm on the road. Thanks!</p>

<p>Calculate in the time you need to spend prowling ebay for a "better deal" and then waiting for that auction to end and a couple more rounds of shipping and you soon close the spread between the value of this camera and one with fewer actuations, especially considering the camera is no longer made and you won't find a virgin. I've got a Nissan with 190,000 miles and I'm not losing sleep over it.. That's a wall street guy's take, not a pro photographer...</p>

<p>Can anybody recommend a place to pick up film/get processing done in Jacksonville?<br>

thanks!</p>

<p>I can't believe I've had this d40 for 40K actuations, almost all of which shot with a non-ai 50mm f1.4, and I just found out it has this damn green dot.</p>

<p>John thanks - that's exactly what I would do as I tend to be a cut twice, measure once kind of DIYer, but the lens in question is on its way in the mail so I'm in the world of theory!!</p>

<p>Michael - Awesome - thanks much.</p>

<p>John - You're right I wasn't looking for bellows extension factor, though that's a useful calculation for that too. My subject is misleading but I don't know how that question (calc) is phrased.<br>

I'm not going to use this for focusing at less than a meter, so probably 12" will be enough(?). I'm thinking Speed Graphic scale...</p>

<p>Hi All,<br>

I'm getting a bit of a headache trying to do the math: How do I calcluate this? I have a 195mm lens focused at infinity. How far will this lens be from the focal plane when focused at say 1 meter? I'm making a bellows and I'm trying to figure out how much bellow I'm going to need..</p>

 

<p>Guys, the dude wants to pioneer. Such people always get shot at. Have a dream, make it happen, otherwise don't grump. As colleagues shouldn't photographers encourge our own to push it? Let the accountants nitpick.<br>

Mark: I don't know diddly about LF, but I say 'fire it up!</p>

<p>Alec Soth www.alecsoth.com. I would learn a lot about how to interact with human subjects. He's written about the phenomenon of shooting 8x10 and the freedom of staying under the hood, staring at people for twenty minutes or more. I would love to watch this happen. His results are stunning, I can't get over it. I would actually probably have to be a fly on the wall rather than an intern, because he doesn't use assistants and must have some special interpersonal alchemy going on.</p>

<p>Thanks so much, Stuart!</p>

<p>I built one myself too. Very challenging to stitch in PS, depending how much of the coverage you're trying to use. If you want to cover the whole 4x5 you will be stitching many images and I find PS handles it better in chunks or 10 or so. The money you save on film will transfer into hours in post. But if you're obsessed and you want a chance to take a lot of exposures on LF to get the feel for it, it could be worth it - it was for me. Best of luck!</p>

<p>Hi<br>

Can anyone tell me the "outside" dimensions of a speed graphic, ie, the mahagony box?<br>

many thanks</p>

<p>Thanks for the responses. Interesting that a consensus quickly develops around "sharpening is part of the workflow" but this doesn't address the fundamental quality of the image on film or getting that through a scanner into a digital file. It's like saying noise reduction is the solution to a poor audio recording - you pay a price for it. Sharpening is particularly a problem when you shoot wide open, because everything starts to get non-stochastic so you might as well be digital.<br>

Justin- thanks I tried using two panes of optical glass and no problem with rings but the height might be off.<br>

Martin- thanks for the example.</p>

<p>Craig - I quite agree, sharpening in PS is not what I got into this for. I should perhaps ask where to get the most affordable high quality scans, and consider the the Epson good for nothing more than a "preview", which would be a drag. If it's $5-10 bucks per image I think I'm back to a digital drawing board...</p>

 

<p>Thanks good idea - I will crop a bit of the full-rez image - I realize a 500x500 px jpeg is useless for analysis.<br>

It would probably be more useful for me to ask if anyone could point me to a good scan from a similar camera from the same (or similar Epson) scanner so I can calibrate my expectations.</p>

 

<p>see photo</p><div></div>