User_5888660

<p>Take a matt board and cut a 6x9 area out of the middle. Attach a string to the card. </p> <p>Set up you camera with first lens. Hold card in front of nose, move toward and away from face until view through opening equals view through lens. Mark on string the distance from your nose. <br> Repeat for all lenses. </p> <p>You now know how far to hold the card away from your eyes to match each lens. </p> <p>. </p>

<p>It sounds like there are actually two things going on here. 1. You want to use the iPad to help with visualizing how the scene will look when printed in black and white. You can do this without any additional software. Just take the picture, go to edit and pick "Mono", "Tonal" or "Noir." After just a few prints, you will know which edit most closely resembles your film and paper combination. </p> <p>2. Using the iPad to visualize composition. Personally, I would find this a waste of time. The composition is there in the ground glass. A viewing square would be much faster. But, try it and see how it works for you. </p>

<p>Do you like mussels? There is a great sea food restaurant next to the ferry port in Oban. </p> <p>http://www.tripadvisor.com/Restaurant_Review-g186501-d732382-Reviews-The_Waterfront_Fishouse_Restaurant-Oban_Argyll_and_Bute_Scotland.html</p> <p> </p>

<p>Patrick,</p> <p>A few practical things for you to consider.</p> <p>If you are building a camera with a ground glass, you really won't need any DoF or CoC calculations to consider. If the image is sharp on the ground glass, it will be sharp on the tintype. You either stop down or use movements to get the image sharp. </p> <p>I shoot wetplates and have an interesting holder I picked up on eBay. The holder is 8x10, but it has wooden inserts that nest inside each other. The one holder can be used for 8x10, 5x7, 4x5 and some of the older plate sizes. I don't need different backs or holders. I just select the insert for the size glass I'm using and shoot in my 8x10 camera. It is a lot more convenient than having different backs and holders around. <br> <br> Sheldon brings up an interesting point about 11x14 and larger. If you shoot portraits with 11x14 and fill the frame with the face, you are basically shooting 1:1, which is macro. There was a series in View Camera Magazine couple of years ago about choosing lenses and bellow's draw with ULF cameras. I don't remember if Fred at the View Camera Store wrote it or if it was Steve Simmons. You should be able to find the article with some diligent google searching. It is something to consider when thinking about how much bellows you will need. </p> <p>For chemistry, Bostick and Sullivan have ready to shoot chems available--unless you plan on japanning your own plates. </p> <p>I got aluminum plates from a local trophy shop. The owner had odd sized pieces left from cutting 20x24 pieces down for name plates. He gave them to me just to clear them out of his store. Unfortunately, the store closed a couple of years ago and lately I've had to buy big sheets and cut them myself. </p> <p>I did a little testing and found that my collodion mix (landscape #7) usually had a shooting speed equivalent to ISO 1 in bright sunlight. It made it easy to use a standard meter to get the exposure correct.</p> <p>I read a great deal before starting wet plate. I then took a one day workshop. The workshop was well worth the time. It answered all my questions and I learned a lot of ins-and-outs that don't show up in the books.</p> <p>There is a wealth of information on wet plates on the collodion forum: http://www.collodion.com</p> <p>Quinn Jacobsen has a number of videos on the process on the net. <br> </p> <p> </p>

<p>I put "Depth of field Master" into Google and found this site:<br> http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html<br> I assume it is the calculator you are using. </p> <p>If you select a CoC of .030mm in the fist box, "Camera, Film Format or circle of confusion" and then complete the rest of the information for your scene, you should get a DoF calculation that will work for contact prints up to 11x14 (and possibly all contact prints.)</p> <p>.030 mm is a generally used figure for PRINTS. If a circle appears this size or smaller on a print, it will look like a point on the print to the average person. Since you are producing in camera originals, or contact printing, the same constant should work for you. </p>

<p>I'm a bit confused here as well.</p> <p>In the first post, you state you are making a tintype camera. Based on that statement, I assume you are not going to enlarge anything. (It is possible to enlarge wet plate, glass negatives, but not common.) Since tintypes are not clear but on metal, they are pretty hard to enlarge.</p> <p>If you are not enlarging, then there is no reason to have any COC calculations. All images will be viewed as originals. The only figure you need is a constant, the size of a point appears as a circle at X size. The figure will not vary from 4x5 to 8x10 as all images would be viewed at the same distance. Perhaps 11x14 would be a LARGER figure, because it is viewed from a greater viewing distance. </p> <p>One definition of circle of confusion I heard was a group of photographers sitting around a camp fire discussing depth of field. </p> <p> </p>

<p>Take a look at the Mamiya Press Cameras. They made a 6x7 back. The cameras are bigger than the Fuji or Mamiya 7, but not as big or heavy as the Mamiya SLRS. </p> <p>I bought one years ago for under $500 with 2 lenses. </p> <p>http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Mamiya_Press</p> <p> </p>

<p>Read "Light Science and Magic." Once you understand light, you should be able to look at the images you've taken and figure out what to do different to achieve the desired result. . </p>

<p>Here is my issue with the whole thread: The first post lays out the shift from digital to film. Okay. No big surprise there. </p> <p>The third post talks about film's survival. </p> <p>The fourth post talks about the death of film.</p> <p>Do archaeologists talk about the "survival" and "death" of bronze age tools? </p> <p>Film is no longer ubiquitous, digital is. But is that the same as film not surviving or the death of film?</p> <p> </p>

<p>Prolix, I prefer bloviate.</p>

<p>Posted dilutions, times and temperatures are starting points. You may have to adjust for your preferences, working conditions, etc. <br> The test for proper development is how the negatives print (or scan). If you are happy with the results from the last two years, then you have been doing it right, whatever ratio you used.</p> <p> </p>

<p>Lenses for the Leica will work on various digital cameras with adapters. Even if film goes away, the lenses will remain usable. </p>

<p>The quick and easy way to calculate the exposure compensation on a set up like this is to use a tape measure. </p> <p>Assume you meter the scene and determine you need a one second exposure. You have a 15 inch lens. Think of that as f15 (close enough to f16 that f'16 will work.) Measure the distance from the lens to the paper. Suppose it is 22 inches. Translate the inches into stops, so the paper is at f22. The difference between f16 and f22 is one stop, so give one more stop exposure, or a two second exposure. </p> <p>If the paper is at 40 inches, then it becomes f40. The difference between f16 and f40 is about 2 1/2 stops, so give it 6 seconds exposure. <br> If you were using film, you'd have to calculate reciprocity failure, but unless you get very long exposures, paper shouldn't require it. </p> <p> </p>

<p>Back in the old days photographers would use a string attached to the front of the camera with colored marks on it. You have the subject hold the string to her chin or nose while you focus. You then stand to the side of the camera and hold the string to the subject's chin or nose to get the subject in the right place. When ready to take the exposure, drop the string and press the cable release. </p>

<p>The best introductory explanation of the Zone System I have found is Johnston, "The Practical Zone System." You can find a PDF of the book here: </p> <p>http://camaraobscurablog.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/ebooksclub-org__the_practical_zone_system__for_film_and_digital_photography.pdf</p>

<p>Jeff. First you say that only one musician is quoted in the article, but claim "there has been no support from the artists for the suit." I don't think you can make the leap from one twitter post to the assumption "none" of the artists support the suit.</p> <p>Second, you state, "If the artists were getting a significant piece of the compensation, this situation would be different." The named musician has a net worth of $20 million dollars. I don't know about you, but $20 million isn't exactly pocket change to me. Just how much is "significant" compensation?</p> <p>http://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-celebrities/richest-djs/kaskade-net-worth/</p> <p> </p>

<p>The suit is intended to send chills through the entire industry. It says very clearly, you steal our property, we're coming after you. If you want to use our music, pay for it up front.<br> The music is the company's property. It is up to them to decide whether a certain arrangement is of benefit to them. <strong> If</strong> the complaint is true, she used the music without a license, without permission and for her own financial gain. She now wants to turn around and claim the theft was good for the music company? Anyone who steals music or video or images could make the same argument and it would be the end of copyright protection. The argument <br />"I stole the work but used it for the benefit of the company" just doesn't fly. </p>

<p>All of my experiences with Dwaynes have been positive. No problems and excellent results. They have developed MF slide and print film for me. </p>

<p>Just to check: exposing the paper in camera will will give you a negative, not a positive print. Do you then plan to contact print the paper negative?</p>

<p>Scratches on film are largely preventable. Keep your camera clean, inside and out. Protect the film from dust, sand and dirt, before and after shooting. Likewise, protect your camera. At a minimum, keep your camera in a case when not shooting, and make sure the case is clean. Before processing, check the film canisters for dust and blow off if needed. When storing film, use archival sleeves and use care when loading or removing. If a lab scratches the film, find a different lab.</p> <p>The worse your shooting environment, the more protections and care you need to use. It's one thing to go to the local park and take a few snaps. It is another to travel for a week in the desert.</p> <p>I live in a rural area with fine, limestone gravel roads. Dust gets everywhere. I use multiple layers of protection to the camera and film. In summer, I even carry an anti-static cloth to wipe off the camera and film before loading. For most it would be overkill, but it is necessary where I live.</p>

<p>We start with individual photographs. By ordering them for a slide show, juxtaposing the images, we can change the impact of the individual images. The timing of the slide show impacts the images, so does the transition from image to image. Music is just one more element that can change how we view the individual images. </p> <p>I have put together several slideshows this spring for funerals/celebrations of life. I tend to get lost in the process and am always surprised when I finish and view the result. i see things I hadn't though of when mired in the creation of the show. </p>

<p>Is the frame that appears positive quite a bit thinner than the other two? A thin negative will sometimes look like a positive, depending on the viewing light. </p>

<p>According to the Massive Development Chart, the times for Rodinal and Fomadon R09 are different. It specifies 14 minutes for 1+50 at 400. Check out the times here:<br> http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php?Film=Tri-X+400&Developer=Foma&mdc=Search&TempUnits=C </p> <table frame="box" rules="all" cellspacing="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td > </td> <td > </td> <td > </td> <td > </td> <td > </td> <td > </td> <td > </td> <td > </td> <td > </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p> It looks to me like you use too dilute of developer or too little time. </p>

<p>Potland, Maine is an easy drive from Boston. Great lighthouses and lobster aplenty. </p>

<p>I shoot the Mamiya 7II. I find that the quality difference between it and 4x5 isn't all that great. I basically quit shooting 4x5 unless I need movements or am doing contact prints. For travel, I take the Mamiya. </p>