scott___1

hi simon...

i've recently got into LF so went through the same mental excercises six months ago that you are now. there are lots of great resources on the net where you can find information. i'll add a few links towards the end of this reply. when the dust finally settled, actually, when i got tired of analyzing the situation, i bought a used linhof technika IV from jim at midwest photo. the camera is in great shape, and it's reputation for field toughness is not at all overstated. it's a joy to work with and built VERY well. i would strongly suggest considering the technika, as you will be hard pressed to find a better built field camera.

here are some other sources for you:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/roundup4x5.html

http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/kit.html

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/how-to-operate.html

good luck, and be prepared to bew stunned the forst time you see 4x5 chromes on the light table!

scott

thanks everyone for all the great responses.

brian, i spent my first 20 years of life in florida (ft. lauderdale, tampa, gainesville) so i know what you mean about the yellow filters having very little effect on the sky. that's why i thought about the dark yellow for a stronger effect or the yellow-green, as i thought it would be something stronger than yellow but not as such as a green filter. as to your question, i guess my verbiage could have been better. the effect i am hoping to achieve is a darkening of the sky, such as with an orange or red filter, but without the associated effect that turns foliage into detail-less black regions. maybe a polarizer in combination with a green filter would be the best solution. has anybody tried this?

filters are cheap... i think i'll just buy a handful of them used, play with some polaroids, and replace the ones i find most useful with better stock.

thanks again,

scott

hi kevin...

try:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=112360&is=REG

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=113844&is=REG

http://www.adorama.com/TPBLD.html?searchinfo=spirit%20level&item_no=4

good luck!

scott

good day...

i am currently purchasing gear from an upcoming trip to

banff/jasper. i'll be shooting velvia and neopan across. i've pretty

much settled on everything, sans the best set of filters. from

reading other threads, i've decided on:

-polarizer (though wavering between hoya moose 'warming' or b&w

linear non-warming)

-#25 red

-either a #15 Dark Yellow or #11 Yellow-Green

i'd like to add some drama to the sky and a little seperation to the

trees when shooting with the neopan. have any of you experience with

these filters?

i know the #15 will darken the sky, but will it also lighten the

trees?

my concern with the #11 is that the effects will be too slight.

thanks, scott

do yourself a huge favor and call jim at midwest photo exchange...

-http://www.mpex.com/

-614-261-1264

i bought a tech iv from him about six months ago and was so impressed with the transaction, i call him first whenever i need anything. he's a shooter and uses what he sells - he won't stear you wrong. he always has a wide assortment of accessories for you 'new' camera.

scott

thanks for all the great advice. in my own searching, i came across a very useful article, especially for those using their hand, dark slide, or hat as a shade. it's a very easy read and can be found here:

http://www.vanwalree.com/optics/lenshood.html

not wanting to lug around the compendium hood, i think i'll first start with collapsible rubber hoods and do some comparison shots with those, no hood, and a bellows-type set-up fashioned out of a box or mat board. if i see conclusive proof that the extra shading from the bellows type set-up is beneficial, i'll eat the weight and pick one up. otherwise, i think i'll stay with the smaller, lighter, collapsible type.

thanks again,

scott

well everyone, using your inputs combined with some other readings, i think i've got a pretty neat itinerary put together. thanks so much for the great inputs!

scott

good day...

i fully comprehend the benefits of using a good lens shade to

eliminate stray light entering the lens. however, is it necessary to

use to large, bellows-type compendium shades to effectively

accomplish this? other types of shades i've seen used are:

-a piece of mat board on a goose neck

-a darkslide

-a hand

-a hat

-a rubber shade that collapses onto itself

-a metal shade

i think the first four are rather ineffective, as they only shade a

small portion of the circumference of the lens. if the large

compendium shades are the only way to go, i'll eat the weight and

make room in my backpack. however, if a near identical improvement

can be made with the smaller rubber shades or the metal shades, that

would be a much better solution for the way i photograph.

in case it matters, i'm using a 110xl, 150 sironar-s, 240a, and next

either a 300m or 360 t-ed.

thanks,

scott

i think i've got around 15" to work with, but i'm sure we'll hear a more affirmative response from others.

size and weight are important to me, so i was hoping to avoid anything in a #3 shutter!

thanks,

scott

good day...

i would usually buy both lenses, test them, and keep the one that

suits my shooting. however, i am short on time here and hoping to

get a little guidance from you folks with experience with these

lenses.

i am looking at getting a long lens to use with a technika IV. my

next longest lens is a 240. after much research, i settled on a

nikkor 300m - seems to be a staple with landscape folks on this, and

every other, site.

thinking that there wouldn't be a big difference between the 240 i

already use and the 300, i looked for longer alternatives. i heard a

lot of praise for the 360 fujinon a, but i couldn't find anywhere a

comparison between it and the nikkor. i am interested in shooting

landscapes and performance at infinity.

i have come to the following two alternatives:

-buy the 300mm Nikkor M and crop if it's not long enough

-buy the 360mm Fujinon A

i don't like the idea of cropping and enlarging more than is

necessary, but if the nikkor is as good as everyone reports, will

that yield superior results to shooting the 360 straight on?

thanks for any insights,

scott

just your standard where and when type question...

i'll be heading to jasper for the last week of july and was hoping to

get a few suggestions on where to shoot and the best time of day to

be there. i'm not really interested in wildlife, i'm more going to

shoot the rugged landscape of the canadian rockies. i'll be staying

in a hotel in jasper and will have access to a car. i am more than

willing to drive a couple of hundred miles or more to get to really

nice spots, so feel free to make suggestions not in my immediate

vicinity.

a few questions:

- i'll be bringing along my 4x5 outfit and 3 lenses (110, 150,

240)... should i also pack a 300?

- my film of choice is velvia 50, however, with all the bright

open spaces, would 100vs be a better choice?

- what are some of the better locations to shoot in... are they

better in the morning or evening?

- which books should i check out for information and inspiration

before the trip?

thanks so much, as i've never before been to canada, any information

at all about the area would be appreciated.

scott

good day...

i just got back from Europe, having gone through security checks in

Paris, Budapest, Florence, Rome and Barcelona, and managed to have my

film hand checked every step of the way.

according to the TSA, it is your right to request an item be hand

checked in the states. however, when traveling overseas, it seems to

be to the discretion of the security agent as to whether or not to

grant you a hand inspection. on the trip out, my film was scanned

once, as i could not communicate adequately with the security agent.

fearing the additive effects x-raying has on film, i thought i would

try a new approach on the trip back to the states.

for a part of the trip i stayed at a farmhouse in tuscany. the owner

understood just enough english so that i was able to explain my

situation to him. he wrote the following note in italian, which i

simply handed to the security agents every time i had to go through a

check, and not once was my request refused. the note read:

per cortesia non passare queste pellicole sotto i raggi x perche

verrebbero danneggiate. (professional camera film). per cortesia

ispezionatele a mano. grazie.

as i said before, this message in italian worked very well for me, so

i thought it might prove useful to some of you as well.

maybe some of you multi-lingual users of the forum can translate it

into other languages for those traveling to yet other parts of the

world.

hope this helps,

scott

hey y'all...

i recently received the following email, and have no idea what the

going rate is, as i've never done any ad work... some inputs as how

much to charge would be extremely helpful.

the enquiry i received read as follows:

I came across your work at www.srosenberg.com. Very nice. We might

have an advertiser who could use one of your photos in an ad. What

would you charge for this type of permission? We're a small weekly

with 40,000 copies going out to the metro Pittsburgh area.

is there anything else i need to know?

what about copyrights and use permissions?

what sort of agreements should i get from these guys about using my

images?

thanks!

scott

forget ebay... or at least, use it if you can't find gear anywhere else.

another vote for midwest photo supply. ask for jim - he will trat you right.

scott

good day...

i was hoping some of you folks here in dallas could point me to a lab

up here that does custom dark room work. it seems the fine art of

printmaking is lost, at least at the labs i've visited.

i'll not mention any specific names publicly, however, my experiences

with two highly regarded pro labs here in the metroplex have been

very, VERY disappointing. the last straw was when i noticed that one

of the prints i had ordered was missing. the printer was called up

and said she could take care of it. ten minutes later, before i was

done inspecting the prints they did make, i was presented with the

missing enlargement. how can they call that custom work, if clearly

all that was done was stick the negative in the enlarger and quickly

make a print using one average value... am i asking too much, but i

thought the reason one pays for 'custom' work was so that a trained

printer would closely examine the print and make decisions about what

needed a little more time and what needed a little less. it's been

a while since i worked in a darkroom, but i seldom made a print that

was simply one value across the board. when i asked the lab what

made this work custom, they said simply that i was cropping a bit

off, even though i was keeping the same aspect ratio (4x5 neg to 8x10

print), so it was a custom job. sigh.

am i asking to much of a lab? does one have to have their own

darkroom to get true, custom prints made?

please let me know if you know of any good, custom labs that

actually does custom work here in dallas, less i be forced to convert

the laundry room into a darkroom!

thanks,

scott

thanks everyone...

unfortunately, my wife-to-be is not licensed, so the 2m idea is out. turns out both of our cell phones are gsm, so in a pinch, i guess we could use them!

thanks again,

scott

hey y'all...

i know this is probably not the right place to ask this question, but

i figured there might be a user of this site that could help.

i'm traveling through hungary, austria, and italy this summer and my

soon-to-be wife thought it a good idea for us to take a pair of those

family band radios (walkie-talkies) they sell here in the states.

that way if she wanders off while i'm composing a shot, we could

easily find each other later.

being an fcc licensed radio operator (kd4pir), i was concerned that

the frequencies the radios work on here, which are designated

as 'family band' may not be over there and we might end up

transmitting on a frequency that is prohibited.

has anybody out there dealt with this?

thanks,

scott

patrick...

i'm sure this response will elicit some replies from those who do not share my opinion, but i have never used a photo backpack with a decent suspension system. i own a super trekker aw which i never use, it was the best of the bags i tried on, but after my first trip with it, i deemed it useless. i will qualify this by saying that at 6'5", my torso length is 'non standard' which may be why the lowepro bag is so uncomfortable.

go out and buy yourself a good panel loading pack from a company like dana designs, arc teryx, or osprey. gear heads will then go buy closed cell foam to protect the gear, i just $2 landscaping pads from home depot wrapped in a pillow case.

everything is well protected and my load feels like it weighs about half what it did in the photo packs.

good luck,

scott

good day...

does anyone know of a reputable dealer that currently has Leica

Digilux 2's in stock?

thanks!

scott

hello everyone...

a real quick question, with what i hope will be a real simple answer.

there are times when i'd like to use a self timer like the ones shown

below in place of my cable release. i am using a 110 super symmar xl,

150 sironar-s, and 240 fujinon-a all on technika boards.

there is very little room between the cable release attachment point

on the lens and the lens board - so much so that i at times have had

trouble attaching the my normal cable releases! i was wondering if it

was possible to use one of these self timer devices on my lenses, or

if there isn't adequate clearance between the attach point and the

board.

the timers i'm referring to are the following:

http://www.adorama.com/CZST.html?searchinfo=self%20timer&item_no=1

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home;jsessionid=AeWBhFaE8a!

-1975602806?

ci=1&sb=ps&pn=1&sq=desc&InitialSearch=yes&O=SearchBar&A=search&Q=*&shs

=self+timer

do these things work? i've read that they can at times be damaging to

the shutter release mechanism... is there any truth to that?

thanks! scott

for anybody still following this thread, or for anyone who may stumble across it in the future, i figured i'd put a final update.

the second set of proofs i got back were better, but still not as sharp nor contrasty as the type 54s, so i designed a little experiment to determine if the camera, back, or film was the weak link.

i took identical pictures in fairly rapid succession using the following setup:

-neopan box 1 in quickload back

-neopan box 2 in quickload back

-neopan box 1 in 545i back

-neopan box 1 in 545i back

-tmax in 545i back

-polaroid type 54 in 545i back

i had contact sheets made, this time out of the plastic holder. the sheets came back looking EXCELLENT. there is no difference whatsoever between shooting in the 545i back and the quickload back - good news, now i know i only have to carry the 545i regardless of whether i'm shooting fuji or kodak emulsions.

the only appreciable difference was that the tmax had blown highlights (of course) while the neopan looked great. too bad i can't buy that stuff locally!

the best shot of the batch can from a neopan neg shot in the 545i back, though the difference between that one and the ones from the quickload back were only noticeable under 6x magnification, and even then it was slight.

i guess my take-away from this little adventure is that my 545i is an acceptable stand-in for the quickload back and to always expect some softness in the focus if the contact sheets are printed through the plastic holder.

scott

good day...

before i get flamed for posting this thread, please understand that i

have already poured through the archives, read stacks of travel

books, and looked through scores of magazines. through this

research, i have been able to put together a rather nice itinerary (i

think). however, since this site has users from all over the world,

i thought this would be a great opportunity to get inputs from

photographers who know the areas i will be traveling to as well as i

know my own hometown.

that said, onto my query.

i will be honeymooning in europe from may 23 - june 10. we will be

starting in hungary (budapest), then moving on to austria (salzburg

and innsbruck), then to italy (venice, tuscany, sienna, florence).

we'll be travelling via the eurail until we reach venice. from venice

through the tuscany area and onto florence we will be renting a car.

my wife-to-be wants me take my 4x5 outfit along - yes, she actually

requested the Linhof instead of my much faster 120 setup. i'd like to

shoot some interesting landscapes, both rural and urban; though i

guess most would call urban landscapes 'architectural'.

as i said earlier, i have, through other avenues, gotten very good

tips on fine locations to shoot, however, i'd still very much

appreciate any suggestions you may have.

i'm planning on limiting my gear to two lenses (150 and 240) and as

much neopan across 100 and 160 portra VC that i can carry. is this a

reasonable outfit? if i were to take alonog a third lens, would a 90

or 300 be more useful? the 150 / 240 is my bread-and-butter set-up

here in the states, so i figured it would work well for me across the

pond as well.

as always, thanks in advance for all suggestions,

scott

hi tom...

of the 19 readyloads (neopan across 100) shot on an engagment shoot last week, 5 of them malfunctioned. the holder was brand new, so no chance of parts being worn.

if fuji gets back with you or you think another letter from a dissatisfied customer would help the cause, please forward me the appropriate information:

scott@srosenberg.com

sorry about your experience, that's tough to hear.

scott

thanks everyone... i'm in dallas, texas and have been using BWC for years. however, the last several jobs i've had them do i've been very disappointed with. guess it's time to start shopping for a new lab.

they contacts were printed through the sleve... i can see the text from the top of the sleve on my sheets. what's more, the letters go in and out of focus, so i suspect someone forgot to put a piece of glass over the sheet.

thanks again!

scott