charlie_strack

These were very fine cameras and lenses. I had a KX and was very

pleased with it, until it got damaged. This is a manual camera, with

TTL metering. This was not a system camera, but similar features to

the FM's.

Nathaniel:

<p>

Every camera and back I've seen for 120/220 holds the film flat by

applying pressure to the back of the film to to hold the emulsion

surface against an aperture gate. Thus, differences in film thickness

and paper backing don't change the focus.

<p>

Now, that isn't to say some fool engineer (I get to say that 'cause

I'm an engineer) didn't figure it would be better to apply pressure

from the emulsion side--just that I'haven't seen it. If you have a

back that does this, then of course you'd have to compensate.

I thought I saw bmitch's tongue firmly implanted in his cheek.

Perhaps I was mistaken.

Dilution B is 1:31 from consentrate, and 1:7 from stock. 1:15 from

stock is half the concentration of dilution B. 1:30 from co

<p>

Are you certain you have enough developer that you aren't going into

developer exhaustion?

<p>

Kodak gives capacity as 5 or 10 sheets per liter dilution B (first

number is tank, second is tray processing) which gives 2.5 or 5

for "half B" and 1.25 or 2.5 for "quarter B" dilutions. These are

8x10 sheets.

<p>

My impression is that it is very difficult to get good results with

such extreme contractions from modern film. If you don't have it, I

suggest you get the book: Film Developing Cookbook.

No reactions, but unless they both need the same development time,

you're like to have the wrong contrast on one.

<p>

Try Divided D76 or Divided D23, which generally don't require

different development times for different films.

<p>

Search the archives on recommendations on using TMax 400 with either

of these developers. Tri-X ought to be OK with either.

No, I don't think LF inhibits my creativity. I don't think any

equipment can inhibit my creativity. I only have me and my brain to

blame. Too bad. I'd like to blame something else.

You want a happy customer so you have a repeat customer. He may have

a specific reason for wanting a certain composition and content. The

more you can understand about his specific needs, the better you can

meet them.

<p>

I've done some art direction in my role in marketing, and, for

example, you might have a specific graphic design in mind for a

catalog cover or an ad. You then need to have a photo shot that meets

the design.

<p>

For commercial work, I expect any photographer to meet the

requirements I set, and I expect to pay typical professional rates

for my area. I wouldn't shop around for rates nor photographers if

I'm happy with what I'm getting. The photography cost, though it may

be high, is usually a small percentage of the cost of the project

where it's being used.

<p>

For example, I may spend $50,000 to produce a catalog, and a thousand

dollars for a photo shoot is just 2% of the total cost, and

inconsequential.

I visited Yellowstone (just a few miles north of the Tetons) the 3rd

week in May about a decade ago. There was still snow on the ground

and the lake was iced over at the beginning of the week. By the end

of the week, most of the snow was gone and half the ice had melted.

<p>

In other words, have some warm clothes on hand.

<p>

Every day started clear, clouded over by 10:00 AM, had a heavy rain

shower and stopped raining by noon. Like clockwork.

<p>

Any how, I've never had a more enjoyable vacation. The park was

practically empty!

<p>

Everything there is worth shooting.

I did that combo once, and I think I had to use the recessed board.

Pain in the ---you know where---. If it focusses without the recessed

board, you won't get any movement because of the compressed bellows.

Even with the recessed board, I couldn't move the lens much. Not that

it has much image beyond covering the 4x5.

<p>

I still have the Angulon, though not the CC400. I like that little

lens.

E. Grim:

<p>

I understand that. I'm suspect Neal's true complaint is sub rosa,

based on some of his follow up comments.

<p>

As a taxpayer, I'd rather my taxes go to the arts than some of the

other pork. Even art I don't particularly appreciate.

<p>

Charlie

A couple of random thoughts.

<p>

1. Neal: you seem to really be complaining about taxes. I doubt

there's any value to making those complaints on this forum. If you're

going to complain, complain effectively. (That means do something to

cause a change to alleviate your cause for complaint, don't just

whine.)

<p>

2. Strict vegetarians cannot be photographers, since all photo

materials use gelatine, derived from animals, mostly cows. Of course

you probably can't use electronic equipment, since photographic

negatives were used in the production of most electronic equipment.

I think the enlarger has different bulbs (and power supplies) based

on the country where the enlarger was to be sold. Be sure to give

that info to Saunders when you contact them.

<p>

By the way, here's a plug for Saunders: their customer service has

been excellent whenever I've dealt with them.

Chris:

<p>

Here are my 2 cents.

<p>

In any artistic medium artists operate at different levels. When

learning a musical instrument, the first pieces are hardly fine art,

but they are to the student. And the simplest melody or photograph,

when well executed, can be appreciated.

<p>

I think we all suffer from failure to appreciate fully that with

which they are most familiar. So the beauty in our backyard goes un-

photographed, while the national park we visit on a trip is new,

exciting, and gets photographed, often, as you imply, from the same

vantage point as every other tourist.

Around 1983 I decided to buy a 4x5 field camera. I saw the Toyo &

Tachihara at my local camera shop. While the Tachihara was a little

lower in weight than the Toyo, the overall rugged construction of the

Toyo won out. It's a very rugged, solid little camera. I paid $550

then, for the Toyo 45A (the predecessor of the AII) , and now the AII

is ... well, very expensive.

<p>

If the absolutely lowest weight is your goal, go for the Tachihara.

If you want some flexibility, and a "system" camera, and can stand a

couple extra pounds, and the price tag, go for the Toyo.

<p>

300 mm is kind of pushing it for a field camera, but 210 is no

problem at all.

When I was in high school I saw the Calumet ad in Popular Photography

for a $99 view camera (those of you who remember now know my

approximate age!), and I sent for their brochure. I didn't understand

everthying they discussed about perspective control, but I knew that

was the kind of camera I wanted to use.

<p>

I guess some of us are just drawn towards detail and image control

and view cameras just come naturally to us.

I suspect that the "commercial" of the 40's & 50's era derived

from "better than amateur" much as today's "professional" is supposed

to imply better quality. I think Komura just carried over the old

Kodak "commercial" name for a lens of similar design.

<p>

This is indeed a camera lens, not an enlarging lens. Fine for studio

work and fine for field work. You may never find a need to replace

it.

<p>

Go ahead and start your large format adventure. Enjoy the journey.

And, if you find LF isn't for you and want to go back to 35mm, have

no qualms about it. Judging by your photos, though, you're likely to

enjoy LF. Pretty soon you'll be eyeing an 8x10 camera, and

wondering...

<p>

Welcome.

If your subject matter wasn't long scale (that is, low contrast),

just develop as if it were exposed at 400.

<p>

If your subject matter was higher contrast, pull to 200.

<p>

Or, use a divided (two-bath) developer.

You could try developing an unimportant roll with the curl reversed

to see if it helps & if it causes sratches.

You don't describe your technique (roller processing, inversion

agitation, twirling agitation, how much developer you use, etc.) so

we are just shooting in the dark, but:

<p>

If you using inversion or twirling agitation, you must put a blank

reel above the full one to keep the full one in place.

<p>

Use only as much developer as is needed to cover the lower reel,

assuming you're not at extremely weak dilution. This allows empty

space for the development by-products to equally distribute when

inverting.

<p>

With normal developers, using a two-reel tank, top reel empty, and

only covering the lower reel with developer is my STANDARD method.

I've always gotten consistent development.

<p>

By the way, use empty reels and add water to cover the lower reel.

Measure how much water was needed to cover the lower reel, so you can

go my measurement, not estimation, on how much developer is needed.

Walter:

<p>

Nice response.

<p>

Simple answer: no, silver based photography isn't going to die any

time soon.

<p>

Even now, for our photo work (catalogs, manuals, etc.) all our photos

start as silver. The images are subsequently scanned. While this

might change, I don't think it will soon.

<p>

But even so, go to your local "big" camera store (not a mall or chain

outlet). Look at all the sizes & types of film they offer. Doesn't

look like they think silver based photography is going away soon.

<p>

Then too, all those wonderful electronic circuit boards start life as

a silver-based photographic mask, which is photographically printed

on the boards to create the etch-resist mask. Without photography

there are no electronics these days

Didn't Ansel Adams say he was happy with his output if he made one

image a year that really mattered?

The Beseler would be my second choice, and it is a fine machine.

Nothing to complain about with it.

<p>

As far as light sources, if you want cold light go for the Aristo V54

VC tube, which has green and blue light present so you can print VC

if you like.

<p>

If for some reason you burn out the motor, Beseler can provide a

replacement.

<p>

My first choice is what I have: a Saunders/LPL 4500-II. I think it

works more smoothly and effortlessly than the Beseler. These have,

however, diffusion light sources only. But they give the same light

character as cold lights.

<p>

Check out Adorama for mail ordering it. They've got decent prices, &

quick service. B&H is good, too.

The Horseman LE is a fine camera, and many studio photographers use

this type of camera.

<p>

I think 150mm is a bit too short for the type of photography you've

described. For studio work, you generally want to get farther back

from the subject to get better "drawing". I'd try a 210mm, maybe even

longer.

I don't know of any, but you should prepare your wallet for the

assult. The last one I saw available was several thousand dollars US.

<p>

Good luck in your search.

It really depends on the plastic involved, and testing is the easiest

way to find out.