danielheller

<p>Like Ellis said, measure the scene (in the lighted areas where detail exists) at some distance from the sun. Do not worry about the shadow areas, you can't capture any detail there. This (sunset) is a situation where you need to get as much detail in the lighted areas, the foreground will be a dark (black) silhouette. Carefully consider the location of the horizon line, and bracket +1 and -1 stop.</p>

<p>That's the thing, 6x7 is not wide enough to create a rectangle, and looks like a 6x6 "mistake", while 6x8 may be just right, and 6x9 even better.</p>

<p>The 6x7 is weird if it looks weird to you for the purpose you want to achieve, and your aesthetic values.<br> Obviously, landscape is better shot with 645, or wider with 6x9 whereas a single object for instance, may be framed better with a 6x6.<br> The reasons mentioned by others here about how the 6x7 came about in order to be better printed on standard paper media, is a consideration but not the most important one, if it is in your way of achieving your visual presentation goals.<br> You shouldn't need to crop.</p>

<p>For the Velvia (slide film I presume) you need to meter in an area adjacent but a certain distance from the sun. Do not point to the sun. Because Velvia tolerates approximately maximum 4.5 stops, the black silhouette in the foreground will be inevitable. You will have no details in this area, and that is OK. You need to capture correctly the sky above the horizon and the warmer location in proximity of the sun. For slide film, you point the light-meter towards the lighted areas where there is detail. For negative film, you measure in the dark areas where you want to capture detail. Meter perhaps a few spots and average them. You are likely to get a reading of 1/30sec @F8 just before sundown, which may require a tripod. I recommend using the Velvia 50ASA for this task, colors are more realistic then shooting Velvia 100ASA.<br> Bracket +1 and -1.<br> Good luck and post your results.</p>

<p>Try Northcoast Photographic.<br> http://northcoastphoto.com/film_developing_scans.html<br> I have not used them since I do my own scanning, but heard good things about them. They offer "Budget Scans" and "Enhanced Scans"<br> Good luck.</p>

<p>B&H - New York City<br> Adorama - New York City<br> Unique Photo - New Jersey<br> Amazon<br> E-Bay</p>

<p>Colin, when mounting and de-mounting extension tubes onto a Hassie the order is crucial.<br> With Sony, no, probably not important, although I will follow the order I indicated.</p>

Thanks Kevin ready to mount it safely now. I guess first the adapter onto the Sony and then the CF onto the adapter ? And then CF off the adapter and adapter off the Sony.

<p>I have purchased an adapter from Fotodiox to mount my Hasselblad CF lenses onto my digital camera.<br> The adapter is a Hasselblad V - Sony NEX (FOPNEXAHV) or HB-NEX.<br> It came without any instructions. Documentation on the Fotodiox website is scarce.<br> Knowing Hasseblad's lenses special mounting and de-mounting requirements from Hasselblad bodies (cocking), I am reluctant to mount the lens on my digital until I find instructions on how to do it. I do not want to get the lense jammed or not be able to take it off.<br> Anyone has experience with this or can direct me to find information about the mounting and operation of this combination?</p>

<p>Daniel,<br> I did read the posts.<br> In all honesty, IMHO the $500 budget will not be sufficient to get you the quality you desire. You need to be realistic about it. I wasn't going to recommend the Flextight (much much higher than your budget), although you correctly pinpointed this most desirable scanner.<br> Sometimes they come on the big auction site at $2,500-3,500 or so. You'll have to have a SCSI connection, the proper older computer and operating system, and take a chance that if something goes wrong it may not be repairable. At least not by Hasselblad/Bron. If you are prepared to struggle to make it work, by all means.<br> However, if you do go that route I can guarantee that the roughly 7000 x 7000 pixels from a 6x6 frame, would be the most beautiful "pixels", true to the original (if you scan them Raw as a Linear scan) that you have ever seen.<br> And this scanner I do know, I am currently using one. I own a Flextight X5.</p>

<p>For $1,999 at B&H you can get a Plustek Optic film 120, which is a new contender, and may do the job for you. I have not used it personally.</p>

<p>I have a Sony Alpha 7r camera.<br> I would like to be able to mount (via an adapter) my Hasselblad V system CF lenses onto the camera. <br> I purchased the adapter manufactured by Fotodiox (Adapter for Hasselblad V Lens to Sony NEX Mount Camera)<br> The only question is whether this will permit mounting of the FOCAL PLANE as well as the LEAF Hasselblad lenses.<br> Thanks for the help.</p>

<p>Yes, Dave you are 100% correct. There are no scanners out there that comply with all three prerequisites you had mentioned "recent" "good" and "inexpensive".<br> The older film dedicated scanners that are likely to be used at the consumer level, have their inherent problems including 1) being old and having hardware no longer supported by their manufacturers (i.e. Nikon, Minolta) 2) lack of software upgrades by the manufacturers of those machines supporting new computer operating systems 3) having a SCSI connectivity (no USB), no longer supported by new operating systems.<br> The "newer" (hope) the 120 film scanner by Plustek, has had a long long long launching...not sure how they eventually resolved their issues.<br> The "newer" flatbeds aren't going to produce any professional film scans (for sure not of 35mm film) as the film scanning function is really something the manufacturers are marketing to be able to generate more sales. We need to call them what they really are = Machines for scanning REFLECTIVE media, not film.<br> The bottom line is, anybody who really wants to scan film on their own and obtain professional results, needs to compromise.<br> I personally wanted to have something "recent" and "good", so I compromised on the "inexpensive".</p>

<p>1.) Dwayne is a well known lab. They have been in business for a long time. If I am not mistaken, they developed the last Kodachrome roll. They likely have a sufficient volume of work that justifies frequent replacement of developing chemicals (which is what you would want). Going cheaper may result in bad results. You also do not indicate which price range you are looking for. Expect to pay around $8.00 for an unsleeved roll of 12 exposures to get you good results.<br> 2.) A good way is to scan your best frames, and only your best frames, by a professional. There is one stop in between the Pusteks, Nikons (lowest) and a drum scan (highest). That is the Hasselblad Flextight X5.<br> 3.) Projectors are not used that much anymore. Not sure if one exists that covers 35 as well as 120 slides.<br> 4.) I own a Hasselblad Flextight X5. I scan raw = LINEAR SCANS with no operator intervention or any adjustments before the scans, saved in the native Hasselblad 3F file format. That is my digital archive to go along my film archive. The scanner also produces TIF files during the scan, which I modify to suite my needs. A 6x6 frame produces 7000x7000 pixels.<br> Dave Redmann - referring to what you indicated I can add the following (refers to a Hasselblad Flextight scanner):(1) "Expensive", yes, very if OP absolutely must own one. (2.) "Ancient", no, it is still being manufactured. (3.)"quite large", no, it has a vertical footprint (4.)"difficult to use", no, it is a breeze! </p> <p> </p>

<p>As long as there are enough people who want to buy.<br> Color film prices have been steadily creeping up. Perhaps an indication that there are not enough people to cover the cost of production.<br> However, I believe film WILL continue to be available indefinitely.</p>

<p>What I really should have more appropriately defined, was that I was looking for "Modern Architecture" not just "Architecture" (while in London proper).<br> So far, some of my prime candidates are:<br> The Gherkin, The Shard, Millenium bridge, Central Saint Giles, King's Cross station (Western concourse)...<br> Anything I missed ?</p>

<p>Thank you all for the valuable information. It has been extremely helpful</p>