max_barstow

<p>Hi,</p>

<p>I want to do some photographs at night; I shoot TMY-2, and develop in Xtol 1:1 for 9mins (all very straightforward). Can you advise me on how much I'll need to compensate for longer exposures? I'll be shooting around the City of London (financial district), so there'll be plenty of street-lamps and light sources etc., so I doubt I'll need any crazy-long exposure times. While I'll take advice on alternative film-dev combos, I'd really rather stick with what I know (and like).</p>

<p>Thanks, Max</p>

<p>Hi,</p>

<p>I have a metz 45, rollei TLR and Sekonic flashmeter; I want to be able to shoot backlit subjects and get proper exposure, but am confused about how to balance the flash with the ambient - if the subject is 250 at f8, and the background 250 f16 (as an example), how can I figure out how much flash power to use? The metz is a bit of a blunt instrument, and only has one manual mode, which gives full power, so I figured if I exposed at 250 f16 (for the background) and then set the flash at f8 (in auto) it would account for the ambient on the subject, but I have a feeling this is all wrong. Can someone explain how to figure this out in such circumstances (and if the flashmeter will help)?</p>

<p>Cheers</p>

<p>Hi,</p>

<p>Certain filters aren't too hard to get hold of for my Bay II Rollei, but I can't find any ND filters that fit (and have never seen any for sale in the past either); I know you can get Bay II adapters, but this will prohibit me using my hood, and seems like a slightly clunky irritating option anyway, so I'd like to know if anyone still makes Bay II filters, and if so, who makes optically high quality ones?</p>

<p>Thanks, Max</p>

<p>I think I'll try the TMY-2 for a 400 speed film; should I use Tmax Fixer for it, or will anything do?</p>

<p>I quite like to have consistency in the look of my photos, so if I decide to stick with Tri-X after trying the Tmax, I think I'll use FP4+ for the slower film, but if not, is the Tmax 100 especially tricky to get good results with (like old Tmax 400 is said to be)?</p>

<p>One final thing, am I going to find that TMY-2 is a lot less contrasty/flatter than Tri-X, </p>

<p>Could you give me an idea of how TMY-2's look is different to Tri-X's in more descriptive terms; I don't really have a clue what "spectral sensitivity and contrast curve shapes" are! What about developer for TMY-2? I like using a one-shot for convenience (I don't shoot that much), and I'd be happy if I could stick with Xtol 1:1, but if there's a better combo or that's a poor one, I'd change. Also, what about dev times? And isn't there something funny about fixing with T-Max films? I do occasionally find a slower film would be handy in bright light for shooting wider apertures, being limited to a shutter of 1/500, so what's T-Max 100 like? Also, I'd read before that T-Max is difficult to get good results with, as in exposure and development have to be bang on; I've never even successfully pushed or pulled a film, and just give the same development for everything (with only Tri-X), regardless of light etc., so please warn me if I'll have a hard time with T-Max (my technical knowledge is v. limited).<br>

Sorry for the inundation of questions, but I'm really in the dark here!</p>

<p>Hi,</p>

<p>I started using MF (a Rollei 3.5F) in about September last year; unsurprisingly, the neg size makes for a huge step up in quality from 35mm. Up to now, I've been using Tri-X EI400 in Xtol 1:1 for 8 mins, with 5secs agitations every 30seconds; all very normal. What I'm wondering is how great an improvement in quality might I get if I used a slower film (I can use a tripod for a lot of things, and have just ordered a flashgun, so EI400 is not always mandatory for me)? FP4+ in Xtol 1:1 is sort of what I'm thinking, as it's convenient and (by the sounds of it) straightforward. Will this give me a noticeable increase in quality from Tri-X as I'm currently developing it, and if not, are there other film/dev combinations I should consider?</p>

<p>Thanks, Max</p>

<p>Jay, I really don't want to get into mixing my own developer, and pyro stuff is quite specialist, and even toxic, isn't it? Sounds even more laborious than stand developing rodinal.</p>

<p>Charles, I tried that once before, using 1:1 dilution, and it gave me very thin negatives; made me rather distrust the massive dev chart.</p>

<p>Bruce, even though I'm dubious of digitaltruth, I think I'll try their time for Xtol 1:1 at 800, seeing as it does sound reasonable (it's a bit over 9minutes, as opposed to 8 for 400).</p>

<p>My inclination is now to try either Microphen or Acufine for EI1600; what are the differences between them, and how will different dilutions effect their results? Could you recommend times please?</p>

<p>Correction, I meant Microphen (woops)!</p>

<p>I'd be pushing in low-light situations (I don't need fast shutter-speed outdoors in daylight), occasionally early-morning/evening, but far more often than not indoors, so that's what I'm really concerned with. I use Xtol 1:1 @8mins normally; how could I alter that to push another stop?</p>

<p>I'm doing everything analogue (I have no scanner, and am clueless about using photoshop/LR). I doubt I'll be in especially high-contrast scenes, and I'm printing with a colour-head enlarger anyway, so contrasty negs should not be an issue; maybe a no to Diafine then, if it gives flat results? Also, though AG Photographic stock it, it's 32.50 for 3.8litres! What's the standard dilution for it? Lex, could you post that PDF link, I couldn't find it. Also, why do you prefer Microphen?</p>

<p>Jean, I used to use Rodinal at 1:25 for Tri-X EI400, and got sick of its graininess; won't it be similar here? I'm also not overly keen on waiting around forever.</p>

<p>Hi,</p>

<p>Having looked a bit, Microdol, Acufine and Diafine all sound like options for getting it to 800 and, more usefully to me, 1600. I don't think I can't get Diafine in England (Silverprint don't have it, nor Calumet), so I'm interested in Microdol and Acufine.</p>

<p>I'm aware that of these two, one won't simply be 'better' than the other, but what sort of differences do they give (grain, contrast, shadow detail), and can you recommend times and dilutions too (at 20 degrees celsius, 68 farenheit for Americans?). Please do recommend other developers if you think they might be better. Bear in mind this is 120 Tri-X, not 35mm.</p>

<p>Thanks, Max</p>

<p>Hi,</p>

<p>I'm interested in the LP160 as a flash to be used with my Rolleiflex 3.5F.<br>

It looks well-specced for what I want (an all manual flash), and is very affordable. What I want to know is, is it good, as in reliable and durable? Is there anything I should watch out for with it? I can't really afford an expensive canon, nikon, or metz flash, and I don't want any of their digital auto features anyway, but I'm just a little dubious of buying from a relatively small and unestablished company (perhaps unfairly).</p>

<p>The other thing I'm concerned about is holding it; can I attach it firmly to the camera in any way, or do I just have to use my hand, at the expense of other controls? What kind of cord do I use to attach it? LumoPro talk about 1/8 Microphone cords; what are they and can they be used with the Rollei?</p>

<p>Finally, as a general question about flash, can someone tell me the formula used to calculate aperture based on guide number, ISO and distance (I'm new to flash)? I do have a flashmeter, but it won't always be convenient to use it at larger distances.</p>

<p>Thanks v. much, Max</p>

<p>Having done some more reading (and thinking) I reckon ISO1600 is the highest I'm likely to need. I've also decided to try out Xtol for EI400, at 1:1 dilution. Kodak say 8mins is good for this, but that sounds a tad low. Also, what about using xtol for developing at EI200 and 800? Does it push and pull well in this developer? Would I be better off trying something like Acufine or Microphen for EI800 and 1600? Thanks</p>

<p>I don't want grain particularly, just acutance and high-speed for bad lighting. And I never crop!</p>

<p>So what about Tri-X at 3200?</p>

<p>One thing I forgot to mention/ask about, is pushing other, nominally slower speed films to EI1600 or higher; how does Tri-X do at 3200? Again, examples would be greatly appreciated.</p>

<p>Hi,</p>

<p>I normally work with Tri-X in Rodinal, in 35mm (so am not averse to a bit of grain!), and have just moved up to a Rollei; in MF, I'm thinking a 3200 speed film might give more acceptable results.</p>

<p>What I would like is advice about developing, so recommendation of developers and times etc. Images taken on Delta 3200 would be very nice if it all possible, specifying developing method. I'm used to high acutance, relatively grainy prints, and it would be nice to emulate something of the Tri-X with Rodinal 'look', if it all possible; how would the film go with Rodinal? I'm guessing badly, but I'm open to all suggestions.</p>

<p>Thanks, Max</p>

<p>I have my eye on the Sekonic 308-S Flashmate; is it good, and is it worth 130quid? It seems relatively cheap, but if I can get something equal for less or secondhand, it would be nice.</p>

<p>Michael, I'm keen to learn to use it maually, and have that option; much better to understand what you're doing before you hand control to a computer. I've done a bit of reading, and have a better idea of how it all works; what sort of guide number do I want, to allow for probable use of bounce flash, maybe using one of those bare-bulb flash adapters (they look quite handy!). I also heard having too high a guide number (ie. too much power) can make it hard to get a natural looking scene?</p>

<p>Whatever I do, I need to rate it at 400, just for the speed. I reckon a newer meter would be a good start; could you recommend something which does flash, incident and reflected metering? Also the grey card is a good idea.</p>

<p>And yes Lex, I initially used a similar development to Ralph Gibson (who I think does about 13mins), then reduced it to about 11, then reduced it to 9. The agitation isn't that irregular, I just explained it poorly; there's some agitation in the first minute, then 10 seconds agitation at 1:30, 3:00, 4:30, etc., and instead of agitating again at 9mins I go a little early, so I can stop development at 9.</p>

<p>Thanks for all the replies,</p>

<p>What's contrast index? I have some sort of notion from the name, but nothing else. I do like the look of my prints when the neg's density is reasonable, so my real concern about developement is whether I am inadvertently over/underdeveloping my negs, and therefore getting inconsistent results.</p>

<p>Stephen, can you translate this into English please!? "calibrate your effective film speed for your developer/development technique by shooting a sacrificial roll and bracketing your exposures."</p>

<p>I think the shutter was okay on the Leica, but either way I've just moved to a Rollei 3.5F, so that's not relevant anymore. I use a Weston Euromaster, and have an invercone (which I've not really used much). I find metering outdoors difficult because of the sky giving my meter too high a reading, for which I then overcompensate (and get an overexposed shot), my problem indoors is that the Weston isn't terribly precise under low light. Maybe I should get a battery powered meter; suggestions? Also, how do you use an incident light meter, and what is the difference/point of it compared to a reflected light meter?</p>

<p>What are bounce cards, bounce filters and diffusion filters? Why can't you control the exposure with shutter speed rather than aperture? Surely controlling it with aperture means you can't control the depth of field at all? Finally, what effect does shutter speed have when using a flash? Does it work in the same way as without? Cheers</p>

<p>Hi,</p>

<p>I realize this is a very old, and over-discussed topic, but I'm dredging it up. I've been using this combo (with a Leica IIIb and 50mm elmar) since I started taking pictures (about two years ago), and what I now do is rate the film at IS0400 (the speed is important to me for handheld shots), develop at a dilution of 1+25, 9mins, with 10 seconds agitation 20seconds into the first minute, and after that 10 seconds at 90 seconds, then continuing this way every 1:30mins, until 8:30mins in, when I do 10 seconds agitation, then leave it till 8:55, when I pour it out to replace it with stop. I realize that 9mins is relatively long for 1+25 concentration, and that I'm doing very minimal agitation.</p>

<p>I am still a bit inconsistent at getting good exposures (I have a tendency to get very thick negatives outdoors, and slightly thin indoors), but am now wondering if this inconsistency is more to do with my developing. What is technically 'wrong', if anything, with how I'm developing, and what might I do to 'improve' it, all things being subjective?</p>

<p>Thanks, Max</p>

<p>Hi,</p>

<p>I want to learn about using flash (something to which I am completely new); I essentially want to learn to use it for low-lighting situations, when available-light isn't acceptable. I don't want anything which looks like it was obviously done with a flash (like Bruce Gilden), and want to be able to use it indoors and outdoors.</p>

<p>I have a Rolleiflex 3.5F, what flash can I get for this that is good? I also have no idea about how to meter using flash, what kind of meter you need, how you take distance into account, how to use 'bounce' flash (or what this properly means), how the power of the flash effects things; I'm totally clueless here, so please assume nothing!</p>

<p>Thanks, Max</p>

<p>Thanks again for advice, I've still not got it, probably another week to wait, hopefully less..</p>

<p>I intend to put a UV filter and hood on the front, will the filter be detrimental to the image quality, or have any effect other than reducing flare and acting as a lens-protector?</p>

<p>Neil, when you say a 3.5, I assume you don't mean an F? I find that hard to believe otherwise! Where did you find this incredible bargain?</p>

<p>I've pretty much decided to get the camera; Rolleis are more expensive in England than America, and the price matches up with equivalent cameras from Ffordes. If I got into buying a 'user' camera, I'd need to get it repaired/CLAed, and replace the screen, all of which mean i'll probably end up spending 600quid, quite possibly more, on an ugly camera, which doesn't seem the best option to me. I also trust Aperture, which is worth a bit.</p>

<p>Thanks v. much for all the advise though, even if I'm going to act against most of it!</p>

<p>Hi</p>

<p>Aperture have a Rollei 3.5F for 790pounds, not posted on the website, which I've reserved; they're holding it for two weeks. It's in very good cosmetic condition (one small scrape on the paint and otherwise perfect), and it all feels very smooth (the shutter speed dial is slightly stiff, but that's all, and the shutter is very quiet). I trust that the lens/mechanics are all fine, Aperture have a good reputation, it nothing seems amiss. It's a later model (I forget which type exactly), but made post-1960, so I think a model III or IV. It doesn't come with any accessories (no case, strap etc.), only a lens-cap; it does have a very nice, bright and useable viewing screen (which saves me forking out an extra 200pounds or so on getting it replaced), with a split-focus in the middle. It also has a working meter. Bearing all this in mind, does 790 seems an excessive price? The camera isn't mint, but it's close to perfect.</p>

<p>Cheers, Max</p>