dk_thompson

Well, in our in-house lab here, we just use scissors, and a clean

light table...gloves too. Years ago when I worked in a one-hour lab,

we had some sort of Noritsu sleeving machine, if you could call it

that. It had a sort of guillotine cutter on it for the negs., but that

didn't guarantee a safe cut by any means. It was real easy to chop

someone's neg in half if you weren't paying attention. My advice would

be to just pay attention to what you're doing, and don't obsess about

it too much. After you do it a few thousand times, you won't even

think twice about it...good luck.

I'd say a small deep tank setup as well. 2 gal. tanks would probably

work pretty well. If you're using one-shot chem. you have to factor

this in your cost, with a deep tank you should be able to handle that

volume on a monthly replenishment schedule. I haven't used a Jobo, so

I can't comment on what your chem. usage will be like. Of course, you

could always look around for a rebuilt Wing Lynch...they're pretty

convenient.

I just had a thought after responding to your other post. I've never

heard of a "Polystar" company, but are you sure the label doesn't say

"Polyester"? I'm only asking because polyester is a film base, and

alot of times manufacturers will list whatever the base material is on

the film box. Just a thought, I could be completely wrong here. Are

you actually shooting with this? If so, how do your images look, when

you say "too contrasty"

Kodak used to offer a high contrast developer called D-11. I guess

it's possible that stuff might be some sort of reprographic film,

especially if it's a bit contrasty. I don't really know though, good

luck...

A dark baseball cap works well for this also...Seriously though, we

shoot almost all of our studio stuff based around multiple pops. On

location though, if for whatever reason we have to do multiple pops,

we usually figure out just how many we need to do, meter the ambient

at our desired f-stop, time how long it's going to take our wimpy

Speedotrons to recycle and just try to "beat" them with the exposure.

This is where Polaroid is really handy. If we can't beat the ambient,

then we'll cover the lens with whatever we can find (a ballcap, rosco

foil, whatever) but make sure you don't actually touch (shake) it

while the strobes recycle. Sometimes, even if it means having to gel

the ambient sources, having this light leak into the shot will even

work in your favor. We shoot mainly b&w/color transp. on everything

and haven't suffered too terribly on location this way.

Just thought I'd add this, we usually send our mural lab a 4x5 TMX

neg., which they bump up to 8x10 on dupe film (not color neg). If I

had to make an 8x15 foot sepia tone mural, I think I'd do it this way

as well. I don't think Ilford makes XP1 (it was always the old

emulsion) in 4x5 anymore, but it was really nice in that size for

certain things. It has that same base as the roll films have. I was

really amazed when we had them match a pantone color. They nailed it

dead on, I guess that's what makes them such a good lab.

Thanks for jumping in here. After I posted my response, I realized it

had been a long time since I had made a c-print, and I was thinking of

how a sepia tone would work out in a filter pack. It probably depends

on what sepia is to you. Brown or yellow, or a combo? The murals we've

gotten done as "sepia" have tended to be a reddish brown tone, but a

bit light. It may be hard to buildup density like you would if you

were brown toning or whatever. I don't know though, really, I was

never a great color printer...I have fooled around doing what you're

doing, but with no aim really. Just turning the knobs on a color head.

I think what this other guy is suggesting would work though (as a

start). The problem I think you may have, is that with only cc

filters, you may not be able to fine tune the tone very well. But,

that probably isn't a big deal. If you get stumped, or don't get any

other answers, I'll see if I can dig up some pointers for you from

some of the folks I work with. (no promises here, we send this stuff

out!) Good luck.

We do this occasionally where I work. We don't do any color printing

in house, so I can't offer you any starting points. We've done some

large murals in the past, and the lab that we use can pretty much give

us whatever shade we need. We've even had them match PMS colors, so it

can be done. Are you just using CC filters, or do you have a

colorhead? I'm just guessing here, but I'd say if you can get a

neutral print, to record your time/filter pack data for that, and just

play around with the filters from there. Maybe someone with a better

eye for color can point you in the right direction, I'm a pretty slow

color printer...

Another place to try for info. might be to ask around at a good pro

lab if there's one nearby. This is pretty standard practice now, to

avoid using sepia toners. I know this doesn't help you very much, but

it can be done.

Thanks for the info. on the tripod head conversion. I really haven't

ever had any problems with mine as far as stability but I have an

extra one so maybe I'll try this. I've seen those things used for like

$75 and always thought it was ridiculous, as it should be considered a

part of the camera. Same goes for separating the focus panel from the

graflok assembly.

As far as Winston Link goes, you all might want to check out the Dec.

1999 issue of "Preservation" magazine. They had a real good interview

in there with him. Thanks again for the tip.

I was digging through my old View Camera magazines last night and

couldn't quite find that issue with the film holder reviews in it.

Maybe someone else remembers it, but they did get into film flatness

and all that. I read it at the time and thought the same thing as I

did when I read your question. But, I don't know, maybe this happens

to me and I just don't realize it. That said, I wouldn't worry about

it unless it was something that happened to me every day. We have had

some odd things happen to us while shooting in regards to holders,

static discharges, weird marks from a holder gone bad, that sort of

thing. But these are usually just random things, they worry us for

awhile, but then go away. The thing to do is to just shoot alot of

film, and back up all your exposures and shots. Strength in numbers...

It could also be a thickness of the base issue. I've cut down Kodalith

in the past to 4x5 and had it be really "flexible" in a holder, but

haven't noticed any problems. Most sheet films now are on a polyester

base, which is alot heavier than acetate I think. Sorry to be so long

winded with this, but the view camera really excells with tabletop

work, you shouldn't be afraid to put it into all sorts contortions if

you have to.

But I'm still curious why you'd be shooting wide open for tabletop,

other than some sort of depth of field effect?

Well, I didn't want to rule out the possibility altogether on this

guy's question. Just because it hasn't happened to us here doesn't

mean it can't happen to someone else. That's the thing about shooting

in general, Murphy will always strike when you least expect it. Some

weird thing will happen on your best shot, the cleanest sheet of film,

and it will be completely unpredictable.

On these old negs I've seen an actual out of focus area in the center,

with sort of sharp edges. And I've seen this uneven edge that I was

trying to explain. You know how you can see the hard edge of a holder

around the very edges of an exposed piece of film? Well, one or more

side edges will be bowed out. Usually these negs print okay, there's

not much we can do about it anyways because they're pretty old.

We don't use any fancy equipment or holders here. We've got an odd mix

of Fidelity and Lisco holders, pretty much the same thing I guess. Now

watch, the next time I have to shoot a huge battleflag this is going

to happen to me!

I haven't had much luck with TMX in XTOL either. Which is a real drag,

because I use XTOL in a deep tank setup in my home darkroom, and it's

been an incredibly stable developer (full strength/replenished) and

has given me consistent negs. with more traditional emulsions, but not

the T grain stuff or any Delta films. For them, I have to fall back on

TMAX RS in another tank. I can't comment too much on using it in

dilute forms, I'm from a more commercial background & prefer the

predictability of a deep tank...but I would think something like

Rodinal 1:50 might work, or even Diafine for really contrasty scenes.

Although, Diafine has always worked best for me with traditional films

as well. Just out of curiousity, how were you running your TMX in the

straight XTOL anyways?

Yeah, you know, after I wrote my response I thought about it for

awhile, and while this has not happened to me on the job, I have seen

some old copy negs that may have exhibited some bowing. I'm talking

about negs that are 40 to 50 years old, long before my time...but most

likely shot on Speed Graphics with either pack film or old Graflex

holders. Usually you'll see an uneven edge along the short sides of

the film. It's hard to explain, but if there's a full frame image of

say a newspaper, you'd see this definitely not straight edge, like the

film was sagging in the holder. Or else, not loaded properly.

I also don't know if you are just theorizing that this may be a

problem, or whether this has actually happened to you. But we shoot

probably about a thousand sheets or more yearly on a copystand and

never have this happen. I'd have to agree with Ellis and say to check

your film holders.

I've used a bit of Ilford's Ortho Plus copy film for doing just

that-copywork. But, if I had the choice between it, and say,Kodalith

for continuous tone daylight work I'd go with the Ilford any day.

You'll probably be looking at an EI around 80 for daylight with a

general purpose developer like D76. This film responds well to a

variety of developers. I use it for copying things like tintypes or

line drawings, and get consistent negs. from a deep tank line set up

with TMAX RS or for higher contrast, LPD 1:4 in a tray. I think as far

as ease of use goes, and maybe using it to simulate an old ortho

emulsion (maybe for portraits?), that it would just be a whole lot

better. But, it is more expensive. One other thing about it is that

it's coated on a polyester base, and if you treat it right, this

should be pretty stable in storage. I've really gotten tired of using

Kodalith over the past few years, mostly due to it's chemistry, and

I'm really happy with this Ilford film for when I need to jerk

contrast alot. Anyways, hope this helps, and good luck.

I was also just sitting here thinking that I've never had that problem

as well. I work in an in-house studio in a history museum and have to

do tons of copywork using a 4x5 camera. Even with a 150 G Claron

stopped down one stop (usually we shoot around 22-32) we get tack

sharp chromes/negs on our copystand. We also do quite a bit shooting

from directly overhead/to nearly overhead views when shooting large

textiles from places like cameras clamped to hydraulic lifts and even

the second floor railing of our building (shooting straight down on a

huge 22' long flag...)and I can't recall any buckling problems with

the film. We use modern holders, though. View Camera magazine had an

issue several years ago where they reviewed holders, you may want to

check that out. Also, I guess humidity might have something to do with

your situation as well. I would think that your problems may actually

get worse with a roll film holder, over a sheet film holder, unless

you had a vacuum back or something like that. Is there some reason why

you're shooting wide open anyways? I've only done this when I've

absolutely had to, like doing an extrememly long exposure on the

copystand where I didn't think I could avoid any vibrations otherwise.

You know, like the freight elevator shaking the floor during a 2 min.

exposure. Even then, I'd only go to one stop down.

Well, I think it really comes down to what condition either of the two

cameras are in. I've had experience with both the Graphic View II, and

a variety of the older Calumets. The range of movements is similar on

the two, but you would gain a revolving back with the Calumet, which

might be a nice thing to have. There are also alot of different rail

lengths with the Calumet, whereas the Graphic is like 17 inches or so.

The rail on the Graphic cameras is also sort of geared, not in a

modern way, but if that track is all stripped out you may be in

trouble. I would probably opt for the Calumet, since this is probably

younger than the Graphic, and the chances of you finding things like

lensboards and other parts may be a little easier. I do have a Graphic

View II that I use for some sporadic tabletop work at home, and it

does this okay. I must admit that I'm spoiled with the Toyos we use

where I work, but this camera was given to me, so I can't complain. If

I had to buy one and had a choice, I'd probably go with a Calumet.

There's enough rail on the Graphic for me to use a 240mm lens okay,

and even though it might seem shaky, it always goes back to the same

spot. The Calumets are the same that way too. I don't think I'd pay

more than $200 (and it'd have to be mint) for a Graphic View body. If

you go this route, make sure you get the Graflock back, and make sure

it's included with the camera. Some people like to separate the backs

on those since they're compatible with the Pacemakers and Crown

graphics. I actually bought a second junked up Graphic View to use as

parts for my other one. I paid under a $100 for it, it might have been

considered usable, but it wouldn't have been much fun. Anyways, good

luck, and I hope this helps. Oh yeah, if you go with the Graphic, get

the tripod head as well...

Hey, sorry to post again but I've got a little more information for

you regarding the non-photographic items you've listed. You may want

to take alook at the mammoth "Conservation OnLine" website, this one

has just about everything you need to know and links as well. If you

don't feel like wading through that, check out the Library of Congress

"Preservation" website. They have a "Preservation Supply Catalog" on

there that lists out the specs. for vendors etc., for all the

different products they use. You'll find data about photocopying there

too. If your state has anything like a Dept. of Records, or a State

Library, you might be able to get some assistance from them as well.

One thing to keep in mind about LE ratings is that it has alot to do

with the storage environment, you know, what happens to the stuff when

it leaves your hands. You might want to factor in all this, like

temp/humidity, enclosures, air quality etc. when you make your

recommendations. I should probably add that I'm not an archivist, or a

conservator, but I am a staff photgrapher in a state run history

museum. In a way I can sympathize with you as part of my job is to

maintain the negs/transp. we generate here. I should also throw in the

disclaimer that the "opinions expressed here may not represent the

policy of my agency." That said, good luck and again, I hope this

helps.

Try getting a copy of Henry Wilhelm's book "The Permanence and Care of

Color Photographs." There's a ton of good information in there about

all sorts of materials. He also has a web site at

www.wilhelm-research.com. Another good source would be the Image

Permanence Institute, which has a web site as well, but I can't

remember the address. It's based out of RIT, I think. Lastly, Kodak

has a few good books, although they may be a bit dated now. One that

comes to mind is "Conservation of Photographs". I think you'll do best

with the Wilhelm book, although the IPI has alot of good information

on long term film storage. If you're dealing with archivists and

museum people you ought to check out both sites as well. Hope this

helps.