andy-

Brand name certainly can make a difference with filters. I once bought a Tiffen 81A filter for color use. Looking through it, it looked fine but I could never get sharp slides/prints with it. Cleaning, etc., did not help. I've since gone with B+W filters (excellent) and never had problems. I've also used the Hoya filters (which are are also said to be sold under the Calumet brand) and have never had any problem.

The Metrolux saves the calibration value, so when you shut it down it's still there when you power it back up. You can also write down the calibration value and punch it in manually if you need or want to.

 

I can't help you much with the question about the Zone VI light but the Metrolux manual says that calibration values below 10 may not work well, so you should probably set the brightness so that it gives you a calibration value above this figure. The display shows the calibration value during the calibration procedure or when you later enter calibration mode.

 

Hope this helps.

Richard, I have noticed the same thing with FP-4+ in 4x5. It has been suggested that inadequate fixing is the cause but I disagree. After I first noticed this I went out and got a new bottle of fixer (Ilford Universal Rapid ) and as an experiment left the film in the fix for an hour with frequent agitation - it did nothing to reduce the purple/pink color. I've tried extended baths in Perma-Wash, Kodak HCA, and even washing for over 45 min. all with the same results.

 

I don't think the color is due to anti-halation layer but rather a sensitizing dye. If you do a water pre-soak with FP-4+ you'll see the water comes out a weird turquoise color. With most films the anti-halation layer usually washes out easily.

 

This problem is discussed in The Film Development Cookbook, and although the discussion is in regard to T-Grain films I think it describes the situation you mention with FP-4+ pretty well. By the way, I've also used the method discussed by Anchell and Troop to try to eliminate the color with FP-4+, again to no avail. Although I am not a fan of T-Grain films I've never had this problem when using them, even with shorter fix times and omission of the HCA wash.

 

I guess this isn't really a solution but I just decided to ignore it since it doesn't seem to affect the print. If you're really interested, you might try contacting David Carper from Ilford who occasionally chimes in on the B&W forum. There is a recent post by him where you can get the Ilford US support e-mail address.

 

Regards,

Andy

Wow, I can't believe the number of responses! I just turned 36 and in

the two years I've been shooting 4x5 I've never, ever seen any one

else with a LF camera, even in national parks throughout the U.S.

Where's everyone hiding?

Just a side note, Wayne the Ansel Adams show is being held in a

different hall than the Weston show (it was very dark) and the

presentation is a lot better. Expect a little jostling with the crowd

but it's worth it - I went twice!

After recently switching to an Aristo cold light w/V54 tube from

a condensor light I've had to increase my developing times by about 30

percent or so to get the same contrast w/#2 print filter. At first I

looked at my negs and thought no! they'll never print! but without

increased development I'm up to about a grade 3-3 1/2 filter.

I recently decided to try TFX-2 to develop FP-4+ sheet film. I exposed the film at EI 125, mixed the developer according to the tip sheet and processed at 68 deg. for 11 minutes agitating every minute for 10 seconds. The negs came out thick and print very contrasty with a cold light. I need a -1 VC filter and still the highlights are blown out. The contrast of the scene checked with my spot meter showed four stops and although the affected highlights were too small to measure they were not brilliant hot spots. I expected to have to make adjustments using a new developer/film combo but the strange thing is, the highlight areas have a definite glow or fuzzy halo effect and as a result the negatives are useless. I've never seen this with other film/developer combinations under similar circumstances.

 

<p>

 

Could it be a characteristic of this developer under these conditions? Any ideas?

Thanks a lot to all who responded. You've answered my questions and

then some! I really appreciate your input.

 

<p>

 

For the benefit of future cold light buyers, I want to add that I also

talked today with a gentleman from Aristo who was very helpful in

detailing the normal operating 'parameters' of the unit. He seemed

genuinely concerned, not only that the light was functioning properly

but that I wasn't about to spend a large chunk of change on

accessories unless it was necessary. It seems they are definitely a

company that will stand behind their products.

 

<p>

 

Thanks again for your suggestions, they have been very helpful!

I've been looking into the Metrolux and Zone VI compensating timers and would love to hear from anybody who has experience with either one. Since changing to an Aristo cold light I've had a lot of problems with inconsistent print exposures. Even with the heater constantly running some type of compensating timer or voltage stabilizer seems necessary. The Metrolux does seem to have more features than the Zone VI, but I haven't been able to determine if it has any manual control over the light intensity, which I need. The Zone VI ,though, seems easy to use and well received. Price of either is about the same with sensor and footswitch.

 

<p>

 

Instead of controlling the exposure time, is there anything out there that would adjust the intensity of the light instead? Or are there any more economical alternatives to stabilizing the light output? The price tag for the compensating timers is pretty steep and up until now I've been plenty satisfied with my metronome for timing exposures.

I'm thinking of spending my Christmas holiday in Yosemite this year

and was hoping somebody out there could offer some input.

 

Transportation - I'd be flying in to SFO or Reno (which will probably

stop over at SFO anyway) and renting a vehicle. Anybody see any

problem with getting to/from the park at this time of the year with a

rented vehicle?

Photo ops - I'd like to get off the road and away from the typical hot

spots, what are the opportunities for a greenhorn skier (haven't skied

in 20 years) or snowshoer (never)?

 

Am I being optimistic in thinking that the park or lodgings will be

less crowded or booked for the holiday season? I'm not set on Yosemite

at this point and have considered other options but right now Yosemite

is the front runner.

 

Thanks a lot for any advice!

When I tried this it gave me a cool bluish tone that I didn't really

care for. You may be able to neutralize the color by toning in

selenium but I decided not to pursue the combination any further and

prefer Azo with Neutol WA.

I recently upgraded my old Beseler MCRX with an Aristo cold light head with V-54 lamp. Very powerful. To get a reasonable printing time (around 14-18 sec.) I need to stop down to f/45! Has anybody else experienced this? The lamp is 70W, for the D2 with the Beseler adapter.

 

<p>

 

The most obvious approach to the problem is to add a ND filter but being one more surface to keep scratch and dust free I'm not to thrilled with that idea. I find that Aristo makes a dimmer for the cold light but that's an additional $90 and nobody seems to have it in stock.

 

<p>

 

My old Beseler has the 'resistrol' dimmer on it for the condensor head, however this is more like a typical resistance type dimmer for incandescent lights and don't think it will work or may damage a flourescent type light like the Aristo. Can anybody verify this? Or offer a more economical alternative to the Aristo dimmer?

 

<p>

 

I'll probably call Aristo on Monday but I was all charged up to do some printing this weekend! On the other hand, I can expose Azo at 2-3 minutes;)

 

<p>

 

Thanks as always!

A recent post questioned "why B&W instead of color". There was a number of responses suggesting a range of reasons for B&W that it was, in my words "a departure from reality" to that it was easier to see in B&W rather than color.

 

<p>

 

I started out with color photography, and after about a year with B&W I've found it an incredible challenge! In color photography, color itself can be used as a compositional 'tool'. For instance, the profusion of colors in a scene of wildflowers, typical in color photography, often ends up 'flat' in B&W. I've found that I have to re-evaluate what I decide to photograph depending on if I'm shooting color or B&W film - scenics that work in color frequently do not work in B&W. I guess at this point that I should make clear that I'm talking about landscape or scenic photography rather than portraits or architechtural photography.

 

<p>

 

Weston mentions a few time in his daybooks that 'subject matter is immaterial'. Looking at Weston's work from his 'daybook' period it seems he didn't mind if viewers saw his cypress root as a 'flame' or his palm trunk as a 'smokestack' - it was the form, texture, or contrast rather than the subject itself that drew his interest. In fact, he passed on photographing subjects he felt were too 'picturesque'.

 

<p>

 

When you photograph scenics in B&W, what is that attracts YOU? Does the subject matter influence your decision to 'make the shot'? Or, is it form, texture, or some intangible emotional element?

I guess I wasn't clear about �contact printing' the negatives. I

believe that with the BTZS or Darkroom Innovations method involves

contact printing a step tablet onto your chosen film, under your

enlarger, to expose the film for subsequent development and

sensitometric testing with a densitometer. My confusion is, how does

this relate to exposing your film with camera and lens, under daylight

conditions ( if this is how you normally photograph )? You are testing

the film in this case and excluding your camera, shutter, lenses, and

light source altogether. It would seem to me that the most effective

way would be to include the camera system and typical lighting

conditions as part of the test. My question was more along the lines

of, what methodology are all of you using to include this yet cut down

on material usage, time, ( the testing in the Practical Zone System

involves at least a box of film and as many papers, and a lot of time

) and eliminating as much as possible the environmental variables?

Kevin, I agree with a lot of what you've said. It never made sense to

me to test your film/development by contact printing negs with an

enlarger when you shoot film with a camera, lens, and natural light in

the field. OTOH, I've found that testing systems like those suggested

by Chis Johnson ( Practical Zone System ) are somewhat impractical: A)

I don't have 8-10 film holders to carry into the field, B) When have

you conveniently found a scene with four stops range between fully

textured highlights and shadow areas, AND are of even tonality for

accurate metering? C) What is the likelihood that the light will

remain constant within 1/3 - ½ stops throughout the scene in the time

it takes to do the testing? At least for me, using this methodology

I've only gotten in the right neighborhood ( not in the ballpark! )

but have only been able to center on the right EI and development by

trial and error over time.

 

<p>

 

This question ( that is, film testing for EI and development ) has

come up from time to time on this forum but has never really been

seriously discussed. Some have responded that EI is simply a matter of

finding minimum usable density on film, though this doesn't address

changes to Zone III texture due to increased/decreased development.

Similarly, measuring my negs with a densitometer and comparing to

suggested Zone VIII densities doesn't necessarily relate to the

quality of the Zone VIII area of the print. Same goes for using a gray

card for comparison to measure Zone V - personally, I don't expect to

match a Zone V print value since the reason we use different

film/paper/developer combinations is to find a combination that

provides micro/macro contrast values that we like - say, increased

midrange gradation or sacrificing midrange values for better highlight

or shadow definition.

 

<p>

 

What testing methodology do all you out there recommend or use? Is

there a �silver bullet' test to save time and materials? Or have I

already answered my own question?

Stay with the 3 step chems at first. Use a large water bath, like a

five gallon picnic cooler for a water bath temp control if you're not

using a Jobo. If you keep tight temp control you should do fine.

Carl, is your low opinion of FP4+/HC100 due to image qualities or the

touchy response of time, temp., variables? I'm currently testing fp4+

with a number of developers and HC110 is one I plan to test. For the

past year I have been shooting Tri-X/HC-110 and I prefer 1:19 over

dil. B because it gives me more development 'latitude', which probably

has to do with using a condensor enlarger.

I've used HC-110 with Tri-X sheet film at up to 1:30 (from stock not

concentrate) such as Adams mentions. You will have to give an extra

1/2 stop of exposure or so or you will end up with pretty thin

negatives. As Pete says a Jobo defeats the purpose of using high

dilutions for compensating effects. For extreme highlights I think I

would rather try a divided developer, I didn't really see any great

difference using HC-110 at such a high dilution over a more moderate

dilution with shorter developing times, but your results may vary!

I have the one reel Jobo tank with the 4x5 reels. I find it's a pain

to use as an inversion tank. It takes a ton of chemistry, about 1.4

liters otherwise you will get uneven development. I found I can load

the reels much faster by hand than by using the loader base. I never

could get the knack of the thing, most often the film simply pops out

of the grooves as it tries to go around. I figured by the time I got

the thing loaded and closed up I would already be halfway through the

process if I was using trays. Plus, using inversion agitation I've had

problems with the emulsion sloughing off at the edges. I personally

decided that using the tank with inversion is not worth it but you

might decide otherwise. If you are set on using the Jobo tank manually

try the roller base. It requires far less chemistry but you have to

roll it continuously. The one reel tank is awkward to roll since it's

so short but I think the two reel tank would be much easier to roll.

 

<p>

 

Many others on the large format message board have suggested Unicolor

drums with a Beseler motor base for rotary development but I just went

back to using trays for the time being.

Thanks for the tip! However, the URL you gave led me to an airline's

web site! A web search hasn't turned up anything on West Jet

inkjet film yet. Can anyone help?

I might be wrong about this but it seems that the contact print is

simply a means to an end, rather than the objective of the whole

exercise. The appeal to me is that the process would seem ideal for

correcting any defects - such as dust, scratches, or out of control

highlights, for example - on the neg and still allow a traditional

print to be made, either by contact or for that matter outputting back

to a 4x5 neg and using an enlarger. Again, I could be wrong about this

but it makes sense that it would be much simpler to eliminate the

enlarging step, and necessary equipment, entirely by output to an 8x10

negative and contact printing.

While trolling through the archives, I found reference to a technique by Dan Burkholder to make enlarged negs via an inkjet printer. As I understand, the process involves scanning the neg and doing any contrast control, etc., in Photoshop. The enhanced and enlarged PS negative is next printed to an 8x10 inkjet 'film' which is then contact printed onto any traditional paper type.

 

<p>

 

Does anybody have any experience or seen the results of this technique? I'm a bit of a traditionalist but the idea appeals to me and still allows a traditional silver print as the end product. How is the quality, and would it allow retouching a 4x5 neg for enlarging to 8x10 or 16x20?

Oops, that's Andy, not Any!

Daniel, what format are you using? I posted a question regarding TMX

and Rodinal for use with 4x5 a while back. I've done some tests with

TMX and Rodinal (1:75)since then with a Jobo 2521 tank and nverting 5

sec. every minute at 68 deg. Although my results are VERY preliminary

I have to admit I'm disappointed. The tonal gradation is very nice

though it seems more compressed towards the shadows and a bit expanded

on the highlights. The real kicker though is a slight 'softness' and

in my opinion lack of overall acutance. As I mentioned in my previous

post my favorite combo for 4x5 B&W is Tri-X in HC-110 and while I made

the TMX negs I also exposed four sheet of Tri-X to use as a reference.

I should be able to print the Tri-X negs by the weekend. To be fair I

should wait to print the Tri-X negs before making any subjective

comparisons. Of course, TXT vs. TMX is comparing apples to oranges,

but it will be a very interesting from the point of view of the

'classic' emulsions vs. the T-Grain emulsions. Initially, though, I

find the TMX prints to be too 'soft' to my liking from 4x5 negs.

 

<p>

 

I'm curious, there must be a following of 4x5 TMX users out there,

what are your results, methods, what type of photography (landscape,

architecture) do you find best suits TMX? My main interest is in

landscapes, if you use TMX to good effect here I'd very much

appreciate your feedback.

Hi, I'll be making a trip to the Ouray area the first week of

September. My main interest is landscapes but old mining areas might

be nice also. Any suggestions? I imagine the wildflowers must be in

decline or gone by this time but the opportunity came up and I

couldn't pass. The local organisations have sent me some nice hiking

maps and information but I have limited time (week) and of course want

to make the best of it. I have a 4WD vehicle so any suggestions here

are very welcome if you think they are worthwhile. I'd also appreciate

any information on good campgrounds and backpacking opportunities.

 

One the way I will be overnighting in Dillon off the interstate and

plan to drive thru Gunnison/Black Canyon NP the next morning on the

way to Ouray. How is the route for scenics, or do you suggest a

different route?

 

Thanks a lot for your suggestions!