allen_gara

<p>Welta Weltini II, ca. 1939, Schneider-Kreuznach Xenon 5cm f2, uncoated I assume. Kodak Gold 200 at a favorite spot in Chicago to run off remaining shots on a roll.</p><div></div>

<p>One valuable benefit when I started using a FF Sony a7ii, which I didn't really think about, was greater flexibility in cropping the image and still retaining a pixel/resolution needed for printing. Just a thought.</p>

<p>If the shutter worked fine, but the winding didn't, then I would assume you'd have multi- or overlapping exposures, not blank frames. Blank means no light hit the frame (assuming it was negative film). It might be the shutter blades getting stuck over the last few frames, or the cocking mechanism not fully charging the shutter. Possibly the film counter, if it has coupling to the shutter charging mechanism (to prevent multi-exposures) may have gone funky mid-roll. Just a thought. </p>

<p>What John said.<br> <br />And lube the shaft with a very light coating of grease, preferably some type of synthetic or silicone based. Not oil, it'll eventually run into the film area. </p>

<p>I assume glass cleaner is fine, it's glass after all. Maybe overkill, but I bought a spray bottle of Kinetronics scanner glass cleaner and use that before scanning films, with a microfiber, then a dust blower. It's supposed to be anti-static. Maybe it is, I don't know. I have a Microtek scanner, and the top glass platen comes right off to help clean the inside surface. It does get dusty!</p>

<p>Using Vuescan with older scanners solves the issue with operating systems and older software/drivers. So, that answer is yes. I used it on all the multitude of scanners I've had, including three Minoltas. I did get sick of them breaking (and breaking the bank to buy), and got a Plustek. They will probably break too, but at least for 1 year you get a warranty. It worked almost, but not quite as good as the Minolta 5400. If a dedicated is your preferred path, I wouldn't hesitate to get the Plustek. You can even get earlier versions, that have the same internals as the newest, pretty cheap on ee bay.<br /> <br />That all said, I switched to DSLR digitizing 2 years ago and never looked back. E-6 and B&W are simple processes. Negatives are obviously trickier. My process is to use an 80A filter, and white balance on a blank frame. I always make sure to take a blank shot as the first one on each roll to get a frame to calibrate off of. Why 80A? Well, with the 4000k LED light source I use, it seemed the most consistent. I did test after test until I figured I tested enough. <br /> <br />The scans had 95% of the accutance/sharpness as the Plustek, but much lower noise, especially in the shadow areas. And that was when I used an Olympus 12Mp E-30. After that a Canon T3i with 50mm macro and 1:1 converter was even better. Now a Sony a7ii with the same Canon macro is hands down better than anything I've ever used that was dedicated. And I have a really nice camera to shoot with. <br /><br /><br /> I have to admit the quality and ease of use is in part due to using a custom designed digitizing unit and light source. Not everyone has something like that, and if you just cobble things together, you're not going to optimize the quality. Film flatness, evenness of light source, color temp, and elimination of stray light all contribute to quality. <br /> That's the answer to the question on limits to quality with DSLR digitizing. Every time you get a better digital camera, you get a better scanner.</p>

<p>Like Don says, I agree with everyone. And the solution is to scan your own negatives. BTW, the flower is celosia cristata, aka Cockscomb. I grow celosias, and a lot of other flowers. It's tough to get the color right with C-41 because in full sun, it's crazy saturated in real life. I usually use E-6 to make life easier. Velvia 50 kicks butt with flowers in full sun.</p>

<p>It's either SX-70 type or 600 type. Spectra film, normally says "Spectra" on the box, and it's not square, it's rectangular.</p>

<p>I had the same experience with my Minolta 5400. Worked great for a long time, then it didn't. Never figured out why, but it's kind of impossible without at least the schematic. Anyway, the 5400 I bought after using two earlier Minolta's, and a few flat beds. It was clearly the best. Tiring of old stuff, I bought the Plustek 7600i (pretty much the same thing as the newest ones). I never used the fancy software, choosing the do the reversals and color profiling in PShop like you. The resolution of the Plustek is pretty OK, but not quite the level of the Minolta 5400. The problem I had was the noise in the scans. It wasn't very good. I use a Microtek M1 for medium format, and the noise is substantially less, though it has less accutance and resolution. Why does it matter? When you try to do any sharpening on the noisy scans, the noise becomes visibly worse. I can sharpen the Microtek scans much more without degrading the solid color (or shadow black) areas. I eventually got rid of the Plustek, and switched to DSLR digitizing. Just my 2 cents, you may be happy with the Plustek's results. I would consider picking up a used older model Plustek off you-know-what-bay and see if you like the results.</p>

<p>Ok, well you were right about one thing. The $7 heater was a POS. It's also not grounded, so the outside of the element is actually at neutral. Found a decent <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00LWSPHPM?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00">fish tank heater</a>, with a nice 6' silicone rubber cord for $31.99. Works better, and being grounded makes it quite a bit safer. Total cost is up to a whopping $88.86. Over time I've monitored that the controller readout temp is within 0.2degF of my Paterson thermometer. However, the controller doesn't save settings, so you need to redo some things every time you turn it on. <br /> <br />I think it's great that people use a cooler and just monitor until the right temp is reached. It's just not the kind of method that works for me personally.</p><div></div>

<p>Just to see how stable it would be, I measure the temps for three complete cycles (set temp, cooling, heating on, heating off when reaching set point). Below is the results. A total swing of 0.5F, and each total cycle is around 3mins, so I consider it plenty good enough. The chemistry temp inside containers will lag a bit behind the water temps, so I would expect them to be a bit more stable in the middle of the total range. Can't say yet how long this will last, but for the price it seemed hard to pass up. Hope this helps a few hesitant home processors to jump in and start doing it at home!</p><div></div>

<p>The controller needs some setup, just follow the instructions. I used a control delta of 0.2F, so it powers the outlet at setpoint -0.2F. You can set 0.1F, but I think it would probably cycle too much. Filled with tap water at 93F, it took ~15mins to reach 105F for E-6 processing.</p><div></div>

<p>Finished box looks like this. Make sure not to power it up dry with the heater plugged in. It'll fry in a second if powered up not immersed.</p><div></div>

<p>I bought plastic poly spheres, like they use in scientific controlled circulating baths, but they really weren't needed. You could get the <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Rubbermaid-Commercial-FG331000CLR-Food-Tote/dp/B00063L0WS/ref=pd_sim_328_1?ie=UTF8&refRID=12T8NCZ5RGXH7MPBP0MS">bin cover</a> for $8.53 if you wanted. So, then just drill two holes for each to locate the heater, thermocouple, and pump, and secure the cords with a tie wrap. The pump has suction cups to keep it in place. Make sure the heater doesn't touch the bottom, and line the bottom of the white handle to about where the water will be filled to. It needs to be immersed up to the white part at least. I don't think the arrangement is super critical.</p><div></div>

<p>I've been home developing for about a year, first B&W without any special equipment, and now with a Jobo CPE2. Not absolutely needed really, but it makes it easy and I'm gearing up for E-6 (and it was a good deal). It's a bit limited on how much chemistry and rinse water it can take, so I figured I'd build a second tempering bath. I've built a few <em>sous vide</em> cooking machines for friends, so I figured this would be easy enough. There are many options for cheap controllers these days, and a home processing tempering bath doesn't need much.<br> So, from amazon I purchased 1. an all-in-one <a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00V4TJR00?psc=1">controller</a> for $29.98, 2. a 200W <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Instant-Immersion-Heater-Portable-Beverage/dp/B000VK0DRY/ref=sr_1_1?s=hi&ie=UTF8&qid=1434736826&sr=1-1&keywords=immersion+heater">immersion heater</a> for $7.40, 3. a <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Submersible-Aquarium-Powerhead-Fountain-Hydroponic/dp/B00SGMI0WE/ref=sr_1_2?s=hi&ie=UTF8&qid=1434737206&sr=1-2&keywords=fish+tank+pump">submersible pump</a> for $9.99, and 4. a <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Rubbermaid-Commercial-FG330900CLR-3-5-gallon-Included/dp/B000VAUFRW/ref=pd_sim_328_2?ie=UTF8&refRID=0D6D5YHXTZT12Q57E4AJ">12"x18"x6" commercial food bin</a> for $16.90. Total cost $64.27 with free shipping. </p><div></div>

<p>I bought a handful of expired Ektar 25 rolls, supposedly cold stored. Not sure the vintage, but it hasn't been made in quite awhile. Color shift is pretty ugly to my eyes. It can be corrected some, but it's not worth it to me.</p><div></div>

<p>You guys are making me feel pretty lazy for buying a used Jobo CPE2! Honestly though, the popularity of "sous vide" cooking has led to a huge market for cheap water bath temp controllers. You can get a nice new digitally controlled termpering bath circulator for $150-$170 online. Other than that, after using the Jobo for a year, I've realized the two most important (and not expensive) items are a good thermometer and 5-6 500ml sized screw top plastic containers. I've been re-using plastic 500ml milk containers, they're a nice size for 1-2 rolls in a tank.</p>

<p>Nice write-up Daniel. The pictures in the old neon sign "graveyard" are great. I've been there a few times, a must-see in LV. I agree on the Compur/SK Xenon being a great shooting combo. I have the same configuration with an Ansco Karomat, Welta Weltini, and a Balda Super Baldina (the collapsible tube version). I keep thinking a Retina IIa would be fun to shoot also. I highly recommend running a roll of Fuji Velvia 50 through the Retina. The coated Xenon renders some great colors with Velvia. </p>

<p>Julio, I'm a little late to the thread, but have a suggestion. I've been doing DSLR slide and strip digitizing for a few years, with various setups. One simple method (and cost effective) is using the camera and lens you state and a Canon DP-10 film/slide duplicator. Google it and you'll see. It has a few advantages over tripods and expensive rails. The unit is filter threaded, so in most cases you'll just need the right step-down adapter (it's 62mm threaded) to screw on the your DSLR lens. There is a threaded enlarging lens on it, just remove it. Benefit is that once screwed on your lens, you can just set the whole system on a table in front of you. The film/slide holders are metal and quite nice to use. You can illuminate with a flash setup or an inexpensive white LED light panel. If you need to lengthen the tube to fill the frame more, you can just stack 62mm rings between the threaded tube and the lens. Make sure to use mirror lock-up and 2 second timed delay too!</p>

<p>I also didn't particularly like the graininess of Tri-X; when I used mail order photo labs for the processing. Now that I've started doing the developing myself, it's a whole new ballgame. It's possible to get a nice smooth look to it (ok, not Delta 100/TMax100 smooth, but...). In any case, I like the pics just the way they are!</p>

<p>Ditto the other posters. The color negative auto-corrects work good sometimes, and sometimes not. Once it's baked into the output file, you can't go back. Unless you use the Vuescan .dng format, if you use that program. There are advantages there. I just scan negatives as a positive, which in some programs (like mine) is the only way to utilize an IT8 calibration. I do use the levels adjust (or black/white points in some programs) to make sure the scanner is parsing the usable dynamic range as much as possible. Reverse the negative, crop in PS or whatever, and save. Then you can make adjusts on copies, layers, etc. non-destructively to the original file. FWIW, I started doing it this way partly because my abilities to use PS and/or Lightroom and/or PaintShopPro improve over the years. So, now and again I want to use a file, and if I cringe at what I did a few years ago, I can just do it again.<br> <br />One suggestion might be to try outputting a corrected file to best way you can get it to look, and then also an unmodified one. Pull them both up and see if you can do it manual better/worse, etc. </p>

<p>Super photos. Contrast and grain with this combination are smoothly beautiful. After using a Pentax 67 for a year or so, I am not tempted in the least by the Kiev 60. It also took great photos, but my neck still hurts.</p>

<p>I think it's rare that I ever post on the actual Friday! Ciro-Flex Model F, Wollensak 83mm f3.2 Raptar.</p><div></div>

<p>Great photos, with a really great eye. I enjoy taking B&W shots around downtown, there are so many perspectives and fascinating views. The older I get, the more I seem to like SK lenses too. Never owned a Kodak, but now I think I know which might be my first! Also, I agree with you on scanning, I do it but the first parts of the process (actual digitizing and processing into a "raw" image file) are tedious. Turning the "raw" image into what you want is, as Mr. Drawbridge states, fun. </p>

<p>Best wishes JDM, and like everyone posting, I read your's first whenever (and wherever) I saw them. I said to myself a long time ago that I get your humor and "where you're coming from", and also instantly realized not everyone does. Such is life on the internetz. Humans can be real jerks.</p>