walter_glover

Gerard,

I opted out of the 80mm SSXL based on image circle and that

maximum aperture focus issue - it may have been one of my

posts from last year that you refer to.

I have a 72mm SAXL which is a must for interior architecture (for

me - others will differ) I also have the 110mm SSXL which tends

to be more my wide-angle for 4x5 black & white but is not wide

enough for many architectural purposes. I also have a 90mm

Apo-Grandagon 1:4.5 which I absolutely adore. It is good choice

for some exterior architecture and for my personal work it is an

ideal focal length when I shoot 6x12 black & white where the

110mm doesn't give quite enough 'height' in the scene. I believe

in having whatever might be needed so I'm catered from 35mm

Apo-Grandagon to 450mm Nikkor-M but if I had to rationalise a

'desert island' kit for ease of transport I definitely think I would

include the 90mm because it is something of an all-rounder and

my other choice would be the 210mm which is another

all-rounder for longer purposes. (I realise you didn't ask about

longer lenses but I just thought that it put the 90mm into

relationship to something else.)

WG

Ken,

I'd be glad to just as soon as I get someone to scan the 8x10

neg here without subjecting it to the torment of an oil bath.

Incidentally, I am in Sydney, Australia which is no small part of

the problem.

WG

Sandy,

I didn't miss a particularly funny picture but someone else

missed an even funnier one of the same incident.

It was this easter Monday just passed. I was out and about

between clouds and showers shooting a few black & whites for

myself in the local neighbourhood. Returning home I pulled up at

a traffic light and noticed a truly gargantuan female posterior clad

in a black thong filling the window of an apartment in a building

beside me. It was really, really pink. It was really, really dimpled.

It was really realy huge. So much so that I was convinced it was

a very clever cushion put in the window to amuse the observant.

Added to this was the back of a somewhat diminutive woman

rising above it. The lights changed and I had to move, but I drove

around the block, parked and got out my camera and set-up.

From time to time the woman whose back I saw would reach

over for the next section of newspaper but the buttocks never

moved. Never flinched. Never so much as rocked. This further

convinced me that I was looking at a cushion placed on the

window sill behind a sofa upon which sat a woman.

I managed to shoot 2 negatives and was contemplating either

packing up or moving for another vantage point. Just then a

slight woman crossed the pedestrian crossing and asked with a

Spanish accent what I was doing. I pointed out the gag and we

both stood chuckling. Then, all of a sudden the woman on the

sofa stood up and the bum went with her. This ginormous

derriere was not a cushion but was in fact a real person. The

Spaniard and I both totally cracked up.

Now the person that missed the funny shot was the person who

missed getting a shot of me getting a shot of the rump. Would I

work with a Leica like HC-B? Would I work with a Nikon or

Canon? No. I had set-up a Sinar 8x10 with 450mm lens to get

my shot. Levelled the bubbles, got under the hood, the whole

routine - all without being noticed.

WG

Sandy,

Since I am not American I can only summise just what your finer

interpreation of 'Traditional & Classical' is. Does it, for example

include both vernacular and grand buildings.

Looking through my bookshel I have come up with some books

that may be on target.

"The Idea Of Louis Sullivan" by John Szarkowski - Thames &

Hudson ISBN: 0-500-34179-6

"Architecture Transformed" by Cervin Robinson M.I.T. & The

Architectural league Of New York ISBN: 0-262-18121-5

"Cleveland, Ohio" by Cervin Robinson Cleveland Museum of Art

in cooperation with Indiana University Press ISBN:

0-910386-98-6

And on a less formal approach:

"Haunter Of Ruins - The Photography Of Clarence John

Laughlin" Bullfinch ISBN: 0-8212-2361-5

I hope that this is of some assistance. Good luck with your

project. If only people were as interested in what has been built

in Australia. Damn! I'll have to make them ibnterested.

Walter Glover

Rory,

I have used (still use) view cameras up to 8x10 on Gitzo and

Foba Ball-Heads. No problem! The exception is a camera like

the Sinar with its higher stance on the head.

Once you set up the tensioning to suit and ensure that the

balance of the camera front to rear is in equilibrium you'll be

amazed at the facility and speed of operation.

WG

Tim,

Just yesterday I printed an 8x10 neg shot with this lens. It is

wonderfully sharp across the field and coverage was not an

issue. Having said that I would point out that I ONLY use this

lens in the near to 1:1 range (and on 8x10 that can be more

frequent than one at first imagines).

There is a space in my double darks location case that the lens

conveniently fits in and I have it standing-by at all times.

I have long covetted the Rodenstock 300mm Makro as used by

Francois Gillet but availability, price, bellows draw and lack of

need have made this nothing more than a pipe-dream. The

180mm is compact, light, requires similar bellows draw at 1:1 to

my standard lens at infinity - plus it only uses little filters.

I also use it on 4x5 and roll film formats and experience no

peripheral deterioration even with great shifts applied. Clearly I

love it.

As an aside I would add that I was caught one day and had to

use its sibling lens the 120mm Makro for an infinity shot and

although the image circle only just covered 4x5 the corner to

corner sharpness was as good as if not better than the 120,,

Super-Angulon I had at the time. But I digress. Sorry.

WG

Scott,

Have you tried Tiffen cine range of filters? Or Singh Ray? I have

the Sinar system of ND Grads in 100mm and 125mm and I have

to say they are relatively scratch free after 10 years on dusty,

windy construction sites and down mines, etc. My greater

concern is that the plastic filters are not coated and with the short

lenses (47mm) that I so often use there is a problem on bright or

specular highlights of repeated images with the application of

multiple filters.

WG

Rolf,

I have a Zoom II which I bought new some 10 years ago

(thereabouts) and I have used it successfully on Sinar, Technika

2000, Technikardan and even on Toyo 45II.

With the Linhofs the fit is very precise and you do need to ensure

that the light-trap bar is seated properly in its channel.

Just shot another 15 rolls with it today.

WG

Armin,

Much as I shudder to mention such a thing in the sanctity of this

hallowed forum it is important not to overlook the fact that ALL

Playboy centrefolds are captured on 8x10 and always have been.

This with inexperienced models many of whom use the

magazine as a launching pad for expanding their careers and

experience.

I shoot 8x10 nudes, in fact one studio set was produced purely lit

by candle light. I use a 300 Apo-Symmar and a 450mm Nikkor-M

but my favourite lens for nudes is a 1949 Kodak 12 inch

Commercial Portrait lens. To use the inherent aberration the

optimum shooting aperture is f6.3.

Once you've tried 8x10 figure shooting there's no going back

because absolutely nothing else can give you the range of

beautiful tones and description. To compare two quite disparate

styles of a similar subject reflect upon the silky smooth glow of

Jock Sturges and the preternatural 'snapshot' style of Sally Mann.

Walter Glover

I'll gladly second that motion!

WG

Armin,

It was my experience when I had a Technika 2000 that there was

precious little lateral shift to the left and only a little more to the

right with about 5mm rise possible. The fact that the lens

standard is inside the 'box' of the camera body is very limiting.

Tilt is achievable but fiddly to adjust - do you have thin fingers?

Almost a year ago to the day my Technika 2000 fell to the ground

and the front standard castings smashed in pieces. From that

day forward I have stuck to the Technikardan and wonder why I

ever went for the MT 2000.

Yes, a sunk panel is required for the shorter lenses and there is

the associated difficulty in accessing the controls but that is little

by comparison to poking fingers into the camera box to alter the

lens orientation while viewing the ground-glass. Another thing

with the MT2000 is the lack of lens fall which necessitates

turning the camera upside down with these short lenses.

I know I'll get a bit of paddy-whack the drumstick from Bob but I

do speak from experience in the field shooting architecture.

WG

Gil,

I frequently develop T-Max 400 in Rodinal. My preferred process

is Rodinal 1+100 for 15:30 at 20º with intermittant agitation

(constant first 30 secs. and then 10 secs every minute

thereafter.) I have lost my accurate time for 1+50 but, as I recall,

it was in the order of 7 minutes or a little less.

These times give a neg which sits on Grade 2 with contact

printing.

WG

Howard,

It is not clear from your post exactly what your intention is but if,

like me, you want to make a mask to provide a white border for

LF contact prints then I can help you.

A lot of the graphic arts materials that were in great proliferation

in the past, like ruby lith, are now as scarce as rocking horse

dung. The solution that I find works admirably is to use Rosco

primary red gel.

I make templates in Adobe Illustrator and cut the gel to custom fit

various formats: e.g.: 8 x 10 with rebate, 8x 10 without rebate, 5 x

10. I have also made a mask for 4 evenly spaced 4 x 5s to form

a panorama with spaces between.

But maybe your goal is something different.

WG

Kevin,

I took my 8x10 Sinar F to a luggae store and found a very light

soft fabric travel bag with wheels and extendable handle which

was only $180.00 (Aust = about $85.00 US).

The criterion was for the bag to accept the 12 inch base rail

vertically - which it does. I purchased closed cell foam in 1 inch

and 2 inch thickness: made a base, end and side walls out of

inch and a cross-case bar out of the 2 inch which the top of the

camera back rest on and to the other side of which I carry

lenses, filters etc. There is a zippered pocket on the outside

which will carry whatever you choose including up to 4 or 5 film

holders. As I recall the brand name is Antler.

If you are intrigued i could sketch up a diagram in Illustrator and

email it to you (might take a few days to do due to work in

progress.)

WG

Bob,

I use a 300mm Apo-Symmar (44º) and a 450mm Nikkor-M (30º)

quite a lot and for panoramic strips of 10x5 I use a 72mm Super

Angulon XL (118º) but the lens I use most is a 10 inch wide-field

Ektar (51º).

In quest of something a tad wider with a bigger image circle I am

about to take the plunge and purchase a 210mm Super-Symmar

XL (60º).

I also occasionally use a 180mm Makro-Symmer HM for

close-ups and a 305mm Kodak Portrait lens from the 1950s as

the set-up dictates. But if I had to settle for only one lens - given

my preferred subject of the built environment in dis-use I would

settle for the 210mm.

Those are just my preferences, others will no doubt differ.

WG

Pierre,

A 'photograph' is a medium of communication. For it to be an

effective medium first you must have something to say �

something in reference to a particular subject. On the other

hand 'photography' is many things to many people - a craft, a

pastime, a justification for collecting expensive and shiny

objects, etc.

On a forum devoted to apparatus and technique, as the name of

this one implies, there will naturally be a tendency to dwell on the

ins and outs of a duck's bum about all things technical and

mechanical.

It is impressive that you have found a fork in the path you've been

following: now make that discovery worthwhile by following that

path diligently and only referring back to the paraphenalia and

physics of your pursuit when you reach a stumbling block.

WG

Curtis,

According to Ilford's recommendations a minimum of 31.25 ml of

Ilfosol concentrate is required for the processing of every 80 sq

ins.

You don't mention the size of the 'sheets' you intend processing

nor do you state whether you are working in US fluid ounces or

Imperial so metric is probably the best way to explain this.

If your sheets are 4x5 then obviously the minimum concentrate

becomes one quarter of 31.25 ml (that is 8 ml rounded up to the

next ml). Diluting at 1+9 would indicate that 80 ml of working

solution is required for each 4x5 or 320 ml for each 8x10 or 120

or 135-26.

As long as those requirements are met and agitation and

temperature are consistent you should have no trouble.

By coincidence I have got up early today to test some APX 100

and HP5 Plus in LC29 and Rodinal so a penny for your thoughts.

WG

Jeff,

I too am a devotee of Davis' Incident System and find my negs

are more consistent and print as preternatural views of what I

saw as a result.

As you are aware the 'lit' area reading is for determination of the

SBR of the scene and has little effect upon the exposure - just

adjustment of the EI to compensate for the change in

development time. Therefore I think a decision has to be made

based on the amount of detail required in the translucent lit

leaves (for instance) and this will depend upon their size in the

image. As distant ojects it may suffice for the leaves to be pure

white accents and for the spaces between the leaves to have

sufficient tone to delineate the leaves in which case I would hold

the meter with the dome half lit/half shaded. At closer range

where the veins and texture of the leaf may be more important I

would hold the meter with the dome directly facing the light

source. I might add that in a similar manner I sometimes point

the dome downwards slightly in the shaded reading if I feel the

shadows may go too deep.

What I like most in the images I obtain with Davis' methodology

is that the relevant tonal separation in the scene is often faithfully

maintained which may not be the case if my decision for a

particular zone placement with a spot reading leads to excessive

compression or expansion of the scene.

I might add that I generally shoot HP5 Plus and dev in Rodinal

1+100 so there is an in-built quasi-compensation that prevents

the highlights running away out-of-control.

Like many others I have worked with spotmetering and

in-the-image-plane metering (Sinar probe) for many years to

great effect but a couple of years ago I read BTZS and since

calibrating my system and methods have never looked back. I

do still carry my Pentax 1º with me and have my spotmetering

data with me but seldom if ever use it. The most telling evidence

of the effectiveness of the incident system is in my commercial

E6 work.

WG

Bob,

I think if you check my post from which you quoted I was talking

about Apo-Symmar and Apo-Sironar W which are from two

different manufacturers and unlikely to be the same optics. Or

do you know a secret that we'd all love to be in on?

Cheers, keep up your support of the forum - it is appreciated.

WG

What is the collective wisdom of the forum members about

repairs and/or recalibration of Zone VI modified pentax Digital

Spotmeters?

The meter will need to be shipped from Australia and I am

uncertain as to whether it should go to Calumet or a fellow (as i

seem to recall) who used to work with Fred Picker and is now on

his own.

Thanks in anticipation of your renowned assistance, folks.

Walter Glover

Jonathan,

A word to the wise ... you don't mention which camera you intend

using the Rodenstock on. The image circle is most impressive

but there can be issues arise with bellows vignetting on some

cameras.

With regard the resolution I don't frankly think you'd pick the

difference. I use an Apo-Symmar and a colleague uses the

Rodenstock W - the image quality is as good as identical.

WG

Being one to relish any opportunity to delve into the Shorter

Oxford I embarked upon a quest for "Lense" .....

Lots about lentils and glass and plastic and eyes and even

rocks but, lo and behold, not a dickie-bird about Lense.

WG

PS: (For non-English English speakers 'dickie-bird' rhyming

slang for 'word'.)

To David haynes,

Thank you for showing your wonderful photograph and giving me

an idea of something I've been missing in my own 8x10 work.

The 72mm on 8x10 will approximate my Apo-Grandagon on 4x5.

Thank you.

WG

My apologies to Daniel & Jorge,

My initial comments were for the use of the Expert drums in an

alternative vertical orientation with an inversion agitation mode. I

use the drums on either an ATL-2 or a CPP-2 and so the

prospect of a roller base had not occurred to me. It sounds like

a preferable alternative and i might give it a try.

Cheers,

WG

Dick,

I regularly use both Rodinal and Perceptol. Perceptol diluted

1+3 with Delta 100 gives the most wonderful high value feel that

I've encountered. Unfortunately I haven't used FP4+ in it but soon

will because I recently used some HP5+ and was overwhelmed

by the wonderful luminosity I attained compared to TMY. The

HP5+ I develop in Rodinal 1+100. It is all 8x10 for contact

printing so until I do some 4x5s and enlarge them I must

withdraw from commenting on grain.

Using Perceptol the way I do I have experienced none of the

adverse characteristics that Scott mentions. Refer to the Film

Developer Cookbook for a discussion on the effects of the

restrainer at high dilution. Essentially they say that at less than

100g per litre the restrainer's nasty effects are eradicated and

the Metol works simply as an acutance developer.

WG