scott___1
-
Posts
206 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by scott___1
-
-
Greetings,
I just received an order for several really large prints ? sizes that will
require the absolute best quality scans available. In reviewing the scanner
comparison on the largeformatphotography.info site, it appears that the ICG
drum scanner is the best option, at least of those tested. As such, I?d like to
have my originals scanned on an ICG scanner ? do any of you work with labs that
run an ICG that you?d feel comfortable recommending? For those of you that have
experience with such things, are the ICG?s as superior to Tango scans as the
comparison would lead one to believe?
thanks,
Scott
-
a little closer to home, jim andracki at midwest photo supply usually has 4x5 across in cut sheets... www.mpex.com
-
Paul, thanks for the heads-up on the Provia 400X. it is not yet available in the states, but it is readily available in Japan. Dirk Rosler has it in stock and is shipping me some in time for my trip. ISO 400 (though i'm told it's closer to 320) with a granularity of 11... sounds promising!
-
hey fellas,
the plan is to shoot with a Mamiya 7, not a P67. The new Provia 400 has an RMS of 13...
http://www.fujifilm.com/products/professional_films/provia_400f.html
you think neg films are less grainy than that? i haven't shot neg film in a while, but was under the impression that the equivalent RMS (i know there's no direct measurment) was in the high teens.
-
good day,
i've got a shoot pretty soon which is going to require me to hand hold a 6x7
camera in pretty low light. As such, I'm trying to determine what's the best
route film-wise to get the best combination of speed and quality. Has anyone
compared the following...
Provia 400
Provia 100 pushed +2 to 320
Astia 100 pushed +2 to 320
Kodak 200 something pushed +1 to 400
any inputs wuold be much appreciated.
Scott
-
i started shooting 4x5 with grafmatics, and still think they are easier to load than cut film holders. handeling one septum is far easier than an entire cut film holder. as to the flatness issue, there's an article written on this or the other LF forum where flatness of several different holders was tested - the grafmatics proved to hold the film FLATTER than cut film holder or ready/quick loads. the convenience of having 6 sheets right at your finger tips is wonderful, and the steps you go through are quite easy to master - you won't even have to think about it after a few tries.
look on ebay, find samples that run smoothly and have flat septums.
scott
-
hi richard,
great idea... i lived in fort lauderdale before moving to texas a few years ago - sorry we missed each other!
scott
-
it's no more complicated than a ratio of the proper focal length to the set focal length. a 14" lens at 28" is 2x the focal length, so add two stops. a 14" lens at 21 inches is 1.5x the focal length, so add 1.5 stops.
-
a normal lens for 8x10 is ~300mm. the 305 G-Claron is tough to beat. great coverage, wonderfully sharp, and relatively small. respected lens tester chris perez rates it as one of his favorites...
-
i always lock the rear and focus with the front. this is to prevent minor drift in focus when i lock the standard.
-
-
jeff, when a lens is stopped down too far, you loose bags of sharpness due to diffraction. it has been discussed adnauseum on the forum... do a search for 'diffraction' and you'll see lots of info.
-
i only know of two sources...
jim at midwest photo exchange and this guy:
http://www.unicircuits.com/shop/product_info.php?cPath=27&products_id=40
good luck,
scott
-
i use my 355 GDD on my MT2000 on a flat board all the time.
-
mark,
how would you suggest us reaching you?
email, phone, etc.
please do us the service of providing specifics.
thanks!
scott
-
noah, i use a bag designed for laptop computers. i found one made by kingston that is the perfect size for the 8x10 rear and 5 holders. the case has a large 'saddle bag' type opening and is divided into two sections. one section is the perfect size for the camera, the other holds 5 holders in a sony neoprene laptop sleeve quite snugly. very compact with adequate protection. if you shop for laptop cases, most will be designed to give some sort of protection to their contents.
-
gib, i shoot a 75mm lens on a flat board on my master technika 2000 all the time without resorting to any special tricks beyond dropping the bed. the MT2000 will shoot very wide lenses.
-
noah, the amazing bellows on my 8x10 arca allow me to get the function carriers close enough so that they are almost touching - both will fit onto one 6" section of rail... now if there was only a 75mm lens that would cover the format!
-
my experience with woden cameras differes with brian's slightly. i actually found the canham wood to be the finest of those i tested. i didn't notice much difference between the ebony and the tachi and came away wondering what all the hooplah is around ebony cameras. if i absolutely wanted to shoot with a wooden camera, the canham is the only one i would consider. however, all of these cameras are in a completely different league from the technikas.
-
i started with a tech IV and sold it to find a camera that was more flexible. i went through several wooden cameras (tachi, canham, and 2 ebonies(rw45 and sv45ti)) before finally coming back the linhof. this time to a master tech 2000. incidentally, i also auditioned a canham metal camera as well as a TK45S. i can say without any doubt whatsoever that i found the technikas to be the finest folding cameras made.
-
brian, i have the same bubble level on my MT2000 and it works fine. what difficulty are you having? too thick, too wide?
-
steve,
i think your follow-up questions are important ones and i'm glad you asked them. i value build quality very highly, initial and long-term. my cameras are used like tools, not as display pieces, and as such, i need them to work reliably on their first outing and just as reliably 5 years into our relationship. like you, i will pay, within reason, whatever the going rate is for such a tool. as such, i found after a lengthy tour through several cameras, that for my needs two cameras were ideal. when i will be going on long hikes or overnights in the wilds, i take a linhof master technika 2000. for EVERYTHING else, i use an arca swiss f-line metric.
in my opinion, these are the pinnacles of design in their respective categories - the MT2000 is simply the best compact folding camera ever manufactured and the F-Line is the finest all around camera i have ever used. in my experience, there is not another camera available today that can compare to these. don't take it from me... i was talking with keith canham about his offerings and asked why he didn't make a folder similar to the Master Technika or a compact monorail like the F-Line and he said simply that there was no way he could improve on their designs.
to your question about the sweet spot, if backpacking is something you do and price is a consideration, i'd say that a clean Linhof Technika IV or better would be the camera to beat.
-
gary,<br><br>
online forums are good for many things, unfortunately, they are prone to certain misunderstandings, as it is not possible to communicate subtleties like tone and body language. i meant no offense, and certainly hope the ebony owners on the forum take no umbrage by my response. i have found that ebony cameras, at the price point they sell for, come with a certain cachet, and this appeals to certain photographers, not all, but a few to be sure. for someone who tried two ebony cameras, one low-end and one high-end, i found there are better options for me for the money. for me, there is no reason to shoot with an ebony, unless i desired the cachet that that particular camera carries - which i certainly don't concern myself with - as i found alternatives that better do what i desire in a camera. after passing a wide variety of cameras through my bag, i have settled on what works best for me. ebony did not make the cut, but i know several photographers that swear by them. like you said earlier, our differences make the world go round.<br><br>
my apologies for getting this thread off track. i shall leave it by simply saying that i tried two ebony cameras and choose otherwise for a variety of reasons, chief among them...<br><br>
1. rigidity - being used to metal cameras, i found the ebony cameras sloppy by comparison<br>
2. set-up / take down time - it took me longer to fold / unfold the ebony then some other cameras<br>
3. ease of use - i did not like having to switch between focusing knobs<br>
4. perceived long-term durability of a wooden camera that will be heavily used out-of-doors.
-
gary,
you do not know me nor have you any insight into my photographic pursuits or predilections so i find it quite humorous that you have chosen to impugn my honor with your implication. if you must know, i went through quite a number of field cameras whilst seeking the one that worked best in my hands, 2 ebonies amongst them - an RW45 and an SV45Ti to be specific.
now, as to your skepticism of my claim that i have owned two ebonies and was underwhelmed with them both, what are you unclear on - that i owned two or that i was underwhelmed by them? if it's the former, that's a bit ridiculous, as i mentioned earlier, we've never met and you certainly have no notion of the means i have at my disposal to make purchases. if it is the later, well, that's the special form of ignorance found all too frequently on these quasi-anonymous forums whereby one presumes to know what another will find of use. i found the ebony cameras to be less rigid than i was comfortable with, which is not entirely surprising for someone used to using metal cameras.
as to my contribution to the thread, i believe i answered steve's question directly... ebony cameras are expensive for a variety of reasons, the high cost of titanium and japanese labor contributing heavily to the overall cost.
Drum Scanning for LARGE Prints...
in The Digital Darkroom: Process, Technique & Printing
Posted
Thanks for the recommendation, Peter... i'll give Robyn color a call to see what hardware they are running.
Doug, operator skill can likely make up for minor hardware differences, which is why i'm hoping to find a recommendation of a lab that has both excellent hardware and skilled operators! if you know of a place that you can recommend, please let me know.
thanks,