z_z1

What the heck is a FW 4.0?

Take a series of chromes using only your flash. Use all the shutter speeds you can, and vary the distance to the subject if that gives you more range. If all the chromes are ok then it's not your shutter or aperture at fault. If you are using older light meters that were designed for the mercury batteries and you are using the newer 1.5 volt batteries you will experience at least a 2 stop error leading to under exposure.

 

Blad shutters get slower, not faster when they go out of adjustment in most cases. I wouldn't be very surprised if your meters are not the problem. Double check them against a newer SLR.

so what, the ones they have are great. who needs a new one?

I use the ND graduated filter quite often. Especially when shooting snow scenes. Makes for a lot easier time in the darkroom.

I believe the Kodak Professional Color Dataguide has a wheel in it that gives you DOF info. It's a good book to have around.

My experience is limited compared to some who have already contributed. But FWIW I quickly moved away from the 210 and bought a 90. After that I purchased a 150. I found that the equivalent focal lengths from 35mm to 4x5 that I used the most (in 35mm) was what I wanted in 4x5. So if you shoot mainly really wide angle stuff in 35, go for the wider lenses in 4x5. I now have a 65mm coming to me. That should do it for WA. The next lens I might buy is something just over 300mm but then again I very rarely use my tele's in 35mm so will probably hold off. The longest lens I have for MF is a 150mm and the widest a 50mm, but probably could have used a 40mm if I could have afforded it. Easy enough to rent for the odd time I REALLY need it. I second the opinion about getting a bag bellows. If you are using a 90 on your camera you will soon become frustrated with the lack of movement due to the compression of the bellows.

funny I've gone the opposite. In 35mm I shot mostly verticals, but in 4x5 it's mainly horizontals. Maybe I have to start expanding my horizons in 4x5 and force myself to look for vertical compositions just to back the rut.

I've taken many razor sharp pics with mine. Make pictures not charts!

Lex you've got way to much time on your hands LOL.

I just finished asking this very question, look further down for answers.

Congatulations. My first time out with LF was a gong show! But the images I did come home with really got me fired up. You mentioned something about mirrors. How are these used? At first I used a jacket as a dark cloth to save room and weight, but after a couple of years found that it really was easier to use a proper dark cloth.

has anyone used this lens for 4x5? does it cover he entire neg?

Being a unix type myself I can appreciate the humor. Anyway why not just have a little splash come up saying your message has been posted and then automatically redirect back to the forum. Simple enough, eliminats all the superfluous stuff and saves the user a mouse movement and click. Just a more elegant approach IMHO. Come on you can do it, I know you can!!

 

Eric

I agree with Lex. Let your photos speak for themselves without the biased captions. I am sure you took the photos to help you express your feelings about war. A well crafted photo needs no caption. Do you remember the pic of the black protestor in Alabama getting attacked by the police dogs while the cops did nothing? I'm sure you do and I would be willing to bet the photographer didn't even think about captioning it. That photo and others like it incensed an entire nation. The photos of the murdered student at Kent State and the Democratic Convention riot brought tears to my eyes and I'm not even American. In news reportage or more accurately photojournalism if the photo has to be explained, then you have failed IMHO.

 

Eric

When you post a message it takes you to a screen that shows all the

people that are being notified of your post. WHO CARES!! It's not

like you can do anything about it. I don't give a rats behind if

people are being notified or not. If this screen could be eliminated

and you are just taken back to the forum automatically this would be

very appreciated. Given all the fancy updating going on, on this

site, this notification screen looks very unix. blah - boring -

unnecessary.

 

rant mode off.

 

Eric

You got the correct answer the first time. It's blad or nothing. That's it, period, full stop.

If you use IE6 it will resize it for you automatically. But beyond that what a COOL camera! Have you contacted the Cambo importer to see if they have any advise?

Doesn't anyone ever use the search anymore! I think it's wonderful you are trying new things, welcome to the club, but please do some preliminary searching before you ask your question.

 

The regular contributors to this forum must be saints as they seem to have to answer the same questions over and over again. Must have them stored and cut/paste them in LOL.

 

Just a pet peeve. Rant mode off.

Thanks Rory for finding and sharing this site. Beautiful prints. Having been in Sudbury years ago it's amazing anyone could find something beautiful about the place. His ramblings are a bit thin in content, but interesting non-the-less. I am sure a one-on-one with him would be interesting.

you might want to try and compensating development technique such as a two bath developer, one of which is very diluted, or pyro. be careful you don't get trapped in the caves once the tide starts to come in!

David they have pills and creams for that LOL!! All this pre-visualization stuff kills me. I can't remember what I hoped to do today, yesterday, let alone remember some high brow pre-mental-parapsychological-hoohaa .... now what was I going to say????

actually a buddy of mine and I were messing around with his old camera junk box and we came across an old roll film camera that still had film in it. We shot off the rest of the roll and took it in for processing. Guess what the negs looked great! They had been in the camera for at least 20 year!! The combination of light tight, cool and dry storage must have done the trick.

so how are people suppose to get more ratings if no one ever gets to see them? maybe I'm missing something here.

I have my suspicions that some of the daily "top rated" photographers, you know the ones, they're on the first page day in and day out, have it set up with each other to rate each others work at the highest scores possible thus insuring their continued place amoungst the clouds. If people are that starving for admiration I feel sorry for them. This is not to say some of the images are very good, it's just that anything they do seems to get on the front page, good or not. I have not bothered to put much on this site for several reasons; don't have a very good scanner, don't have a lot of time to piss around with PS. I live in the darkroom, and while I make a good living selling my prints, the web representations are very sub-standard. I don't want to have some wet-behind-the-ears type telling me my image is fuzzy or muddy just because the scan is bad. But then again as I've already mentioned, who cares what they say.

Felix, at first I too was put off by these anon. people hurling low scores around like feathers flying in a chicken coup when the fox attacks. But then again I realized I was being thin skinned and who cares about these putz's anyway. I don't give a rats behind what my "score" is on photo.net. I do however enjoy comments from people. On the odd occasion when I've had a bad day and feel like crapping on someone I do actually email a reviewer who has given me an unusually low score compared to what others have given me and asked them to elaborate on their numericial critique of my photo. In most cases they just said did't get into that type of subject matter or some other crap like that. So in those cases they should not even bother rating as all they are doing is really saying "I don't like pictures of churchs" I would have rather seen a picture of someone with purple hair and pins through their nipples. So don't put to much in what others say about your art. If it pleases you and you are able to convey the message you where trying to, that should be good enough. I am always tickled that people are willing to share their art with me. I try and respect this gift. I do rate photos and I think I'm being fairly honest when I do. After 30+ years of doing this, many of them as a professional, I think I have some relavent input to share. If it were up to me I would get rid of the numerical rating system. Have you asked Farber to explain his judging criteria?