galileo42

<p>Well-informed replies, all. Thank you.</p>

<p>Yes! I stand corrected. I just checked a neg recently processed in D-76, and what do you know? There is this slight purple hue. But it is very, very subtle. I hadn't noticed it. I had to put a neg of Plus-X next to it to see the difference. But, Lex, tell me if I got this right: the purple hue is apparent only in the new Tri-X emulsion? I guess it's the one called «400 TX», am I right? I am just going back to b&w film, and I don't remember. Thanks again, all.</p>

<p>Thanks, friends. Peter, you say «normal»? I've never had a purple TX negative myself, in D-76, Xtol, HC-110, Rodinal, DDX... you name it. I've had purple XP2 and orange T400CN, if I remember well, but TX? Jim, that sounds sensible. Insufficient fixing? So, you mean do a re-fix, like a normal fix, three, four minutes with standard agitation? Then wash as usual? Would you wet the negs before fixing? Thanks again.</p>

<p>Thank you all. Still not developed. I'll do it over the week-end. Cheers.</p>

<p>A friends' young student daughter is taking photo courses and she had two rolls of Tri-X to develop. For some reason, she decided to drop them at a drugstore for processing. Not the best idea, but, hey, sometimes your priorities may wander a bit. Anyway, now she's got her negatives back and she says they're slightly purple all over. I haven't seen them, but she says they look like they have details in the shadows and highlights and that the markings on the edges are crisp. Only this purple hue is strange. What do you make of that? Can she still print them in the darkroom? Thanks for your insight.</p>

<p>Is there a time limit to process a b&w flm after it's been exposed, or can it wait a few weeks, or even months, without damaging it? Thank you.</p>

<p>Come to think of it, Jaime says he focused on the eyes and mouth AREA. I don't see any real dark area there that could induce such over-exposure with spot metering. You don't think the right eye, which seems to be almost in the very center of the image, could do that, do you, guys?</p>

<p>I use 300 ml for one roll of 135 and 500 ml for 120 in Paterson tanks. Yes, that's respectively 10 and 17 fl. oz.</p>

<p>How about good old 28-105/3.5-4.5? Not very fast, but gives excellent results with FX, is reasonably solid, and not expensive at all. And it even has a decent macro feature.</p>

<p>My experience is that yellow and orange filters with chromogenic b&w result in darker effects than with conventional b&w, especially with blue skies. YMMV.</p>

<p>Thanks, Robert. Let me add that fast autofocus is not important, since I will be using the camera mostly in the studio, or in manual mode.</p>

<p>I've had both a Blad V system and a Contax 645. Both gave terrific images, in a different way. I am again looking into medium format, but with more stringent economic awareness. Would I be very disappointed with a used Mamyia 645 AFD system with 80 mm lens after the two others, given that it is less than half the price, 1) imagewise, 2) buildwise?</p>

<p>Thank you.</p>

<p>So, okay, what I suffer from is - sigh - presbyopia. I thought I could pretend this was NOT age-related :) Now, here are the figures which could be a starting point for some: when I buy those cheap reading glasses hanging from the display at the drugstore (the ones meant to be tossed around, shoved in my jeans pocket, forgotten, broken and finally lost, not like the very expensives ones I buy from my optometrist) I take a +3 prescription. The best diopter corrector (on my F3, FM2, even my M8...) so far has been +1. It gives you an idea.</p>

<p>Contacts? Then you are near-sighted, right? Thus you need a «-» diopter correction. But make sure you don't suffer from astigmatism as well. Then, no diopter correction will help. Been there, done that, got the diopter correctors anyway :) Helps my far-sightedness, not the strong astigmatism in my - of all my eyes - right eye. But it was nice on my now parted Mamiya 7II.</p>

<p>Why on earth would you want to change a Rolleiflex - CLAed and Maxwelled at that - for a Mamiya?</p>

<p>I'd be so afraid they might try to put a looney in one of my orifices.</p>

<p>The SB-800 has a sync socket, so I guess you can use a sync cable connected to a flashmeter, for example, and trigger the flash with the flashmeter.</p>

<p>And, yes, flash output set in in Manual will be respected with the test buton.</p>

<p>Of course, if you want to manually trigger your flash, you should put it on a remote tripod, not on the camera. because you're sure to shake the camera. But you knew that, of course. If it's on the camera, then you'll have to use a remote triggering device (Pocket Wizzard, MicroSync, Elinchrom...)</p>

<p>Dan, what I'm actually referring to is adjustments to shadows and highlights, and overall contrast and tones, then applying them to the six frames of the strip I'm going to batch scan, without having to redo it for every frame.</p>

<p>Janne, what do you mean by «mark the frame»?</p>

<p>Thank you both.</p>

<p>Thanks, Lex.</p>

<p>And, David? Did you try L.L. Lozeau? Was my reply helpful?</p>

<p>I am just starting to use Vuescan 8.4 in a Power Mac and Coolscan LS 4000 (used Nikon Scan before) but I have yet to find a way to save a set of image adjustments and apply them to, say, a six frames strip, before launching the scan. Can you help? Thank you.</p>

<p>That's what I thought. Panchromatic, of course. I guess I'll keep loading my reels in the dark. Thank you all.</p>

<p>Fast glass, viewfinder, quality for prints 8x10, autofocus, reduced zoom range, low light?<br>

I don't see how you can not go for the Lumix LX-3 (or the twice as expensive Leica D-Lux 4): 24-70/f:2-2.8, image stabilisation, very good up to 800 ISO, viewfinder for 24 mm... and very smart.</p>

<p>Yes, go for digital, then, later, you'll have the joy of going back to film :) G10 vs DSLR? Almost impossible to answer that question, they're so different. You weigh your own pros and cons. You hate having to lug around the bulk of a DSLR system? Then go for the G10. Changing lenses is more important? Then go with a DSLR. Is price important? Only you can anwer. The G10 is great, but I prefer the Lumix LX-3.</p>

<p>I never thought of asking because I never needed to, but I'm getting curious: we all know that the red light in a darkroom allows you to work printing paper without exposing it to harmful light. But what about negative b&w film? Is it sensible to that same red light or not? Sorry for asking what will seem obvious to many.</p>