william_littman1

Thanks Ray The mamiya lenses arent Digital.no tilt shift but Im sure it can be of service to some. The test shot on mine at 645 pm in a rental shop lit only by overhead neon at 2.8 aimed shot with no preparation says the rf plus the parallelism rival or exceed auto focus. My 45 makes no more sense on on paper than any other camera yet in comparing a Pentax 67 has a synergistic math that makes it more apealing than a Rz for editorial purposes. The numbers on how many editorial success in one versus the other are staggering despite any stats that may be higher on the Mamiya. The winning stat isb synergy of function at the decisive moment. This is impossible to document except by the preferential choice. It would only make sense to those who put the pedal to the meddle. So My 45 was preffered for its synergy and the math shows in the images As in the case of the Pentax. Those who put the pedal to the medal and get the results say the math is there and those who dont say the math is irrelevant and apearance similarities are all that is evident. There is a difference in candidness and ease to obtain an artistic composition if you seek that the Digital prototype has the same math. I have accepted the math matters to some and not to others maybe that epiphany happened 146 days ago.

Time is such an arbitrary measure... They say the only true time is the present and all else being just 3 dimmensional perceptions. Maybe then it was indeed posted 146 days from now and Im glad you are that far ahead of the game.

Diagonal view of prototype 1 Obviously the back is what it is a mounstrocity at this stage because I didnt have the right back or the right body size but prototype 1 is about verifying the viability of the utility which ergonomics won't yield. so before I make it cozy I need to know If its worth it from an utilitarian standpoint.<div></div>

Prototype1 with 80 mp leaf Aptus<div></div>

Prototype 1 Rear view I used a standard v plate sliding bk because was available but if i make the camera the ground glass feature wont be by sliding but an insert that will fit v mount.<div></div>

First prototype in closed position<div></div>

Front of first prototype<div></div>

Not yet in production. Spent a fortune. Made a prototype . Findings: Works like a charm. Focus 1 ft to infinity with rangefinder. Coupled patallax true for 6x4,5. Added features parallelism enables to shoot wide open with hih gain as shown in the test shot posted shot at f 2.8. Resolution Digital 80 megapixel film: depending on the iso and quality of scan I guess. Camera rear would be made by kapture group or similar to enable shift of 1/3 of the frame each way and full stitch of 2 frames for panorama. Back would work by click stops with an added thumscrew to lock positions if chosen. Camera front. 80 or 60 mm Schneider Digitar perfectible parallelism tilt in the vertical and swing in the horizontal macro to 5 inches Additional findings need to make a smaller body to approximate a Bessa II in size for pantography reasons. Use of medium format dslr is way down and the actual dslr body may not cost that much if u buy a leaf or phase one so I need to know if there would be an interest for a HD rangefinder 80 mp Digital camera. I estimate cost to be between 6-8000 per unit and could come down to 4500 if there was a high demand which Im not anticipating. I have to now decide if its worth my time to pursue this further. If so I will need to do a crowdfunding to finanse the final prototype stage. If I pursue this further the csmera will be introduced at the Next Photo Plus expo.<div></div>

I remember seeing something where new product introductions were not considered spam and encouraged. Ten years ago we were discussing 4x5 and this is medium format. Life is so short. why distract your valuable time on subjects which dont interest you?

Good Evening Photo.net. Introduction Before saying what I came here to say today I must admit that time has helped me put things into perspective. I was excesively naive in failing to realise that no matter what the case may be people are equally divided on any issue and nothing one can do will change that and then it is definitely not worth it. My point is the math on technology and performanse matters somewhat to some. that is all that matters. The rest doesnt really matter and I should have been wiser in avoiding pointless arguments. There are no patents on the actual 3x4 pack film conversion for what refers to the back of the camera. When Polaroid OEM had me speak with Bob at 4 Designs in 2000 he told me that there were no patents on the 3x4 because it was costly. 14 years later I have to say I should have avoided the costs myself on other projects... History on the Improvement Before I started making 4x5 cameras I was making a rather simple pack film camera to support my art photography projects. At that time Polaroid had an OEM dealing with pack film and such reputation and having made over 8000 conversions was something which was rather intimidating. After my first 10 cameras things got out of hand as the clients who I had made them for were the assistants to Annie Liebovits Meisel Weber Demarchelier Newton etc. In less than 3 months people were trading in their 4 designs cameras and buy mine for double the price. It sounds attractive but it wasnt as it was taking all my time and I was left with little or no time to shoot and then the money wasnt so great. When I introduced the 4x5 I had to abandon the 3x4 because the larger negative was so crisp and I hadnt yet invented perfectible parallelism so 3x4 Polaroid was definitely less attractive than 4x5. In 2008 Polaroid 4x5 ceased and eventualy so did Fuji 4x5. All of a sudden peel apart colour film was limited to Fuji 100c. A year ago I finaly got arround to making the first Littman 34 with perfectible parallelism and then made ten which have been in the field working. We always allow for a year of prototype stage to see what is hype and the opposite which is what the new tech can actualy hype in terms of results. As I had anticipated adding perfectible parallelism bumps up the quality to aproximate 4x5 quality without having to stop down the lens. For use of the print as final art in scan the new tech suffices. but you can go a step further and use onone true fractals if u wish to go insanely large. Another option for higher quality is recovering the negative by clearing the black backing though I would rate that as laborious and still experimental. In the early days of 4x5 camera building I really wanted the perfectible parallelism but I didnt have the money or 7 years to wait which is how long it took me to launch it. so I modified the lenses instead for a variety of enhancements but when I finaly got the parallelism right the lens improvements were no longer necessary and clearly less desireable. What is the big deal with this parallelism? Large format lenses were designed optimised for max performance at f22 because using tilts and shifts the old timers figured max performance at Iris mid range (half way between wide open and f64 was probably the safest bet but when it came down to the smaller hand held cameras you had to either have. sunny 16(sun) or strobe it. I wouldnt mind sending out a loaner for purposes of a review to a user who has an extensive trajectory of using 3x4 peel apart for portraiture or fashion. Here is a Front standard parallelism verification shown in several angles. At the bottom the camera film plane is flush with the film plane and secured and a fixed forklift shaped precision grinded jig mirrors the film plane and so the lens board is deemed truly parallel when all 4 corners touch the fork simultaneously. If the check fails the front standard is reset until its absolutely perfect. Important to point out that since the improvement was introduced in 2007 there hasnt been a single request for readjustment of the parallelism from owners except in cases where actual damage occurred or was extensively forced. This only proves the bracing reinforces the arms and that our new infinity reverse system is not as likely to cause bending problems as the original may have. Pack film cameras have been arround since the 60s and for most uses seem to perform well. What Im introducing is an improvement for a very high end expectation which is costly to make and Im not representing it as nesessary for any other purpose than achieving the utmost HD that this film can yield while hand held without needing artificial light or stopdown. If you find this interesting I am looking forward to your opinion. The concesus on instant peel apart film seems to be worthy for testing light exposure or many value it as lesser than wet film. True but it can have a great artistic quality which is quite unique and Fuji 100c is of a higher resolution than any Polaroid color film. Thank you.<div></div>

Heads up on Fuji 100c Availability Us Rep says sales extremely healthy. Pricing 1-1,25 per shot. Quality I say its better than 669 ever was Use of the negative 2) Some figured out a way to clear the black backing on the negative to obtain a 3x4 full size negative. Alternatives are using oven cleaners bleaches and other harsh chemicals. 3) My question Has anyone figured out a method that effectively removes the backing effortlessly and with no harm to the acetate? Question 2 Film base everyone has by noticed colour negatives have a caramel color base. 100 c has a crystal clear base. Which gives it a cross process range of e6 to negative. Great as a HC black and white neg. But to get standardised color range here are a few options. When printing on photo paper get a imageless colour neg from a film lab and sandwich it or dial in its curve into your enlargers head. Whats best? When scanning do you also sandwich or adjust curves or add the orange base tone as a new transoarent layer or add at cymk? Whats best? Im thinking a crowdfunding to encourage an after market clearing kit is the answer as Fuji wont touch the added advantage but Imho the resulting sales revenue when people use the film for its negative would also ensure Fuji doesnt touch the discontinuation button for many more years. What is your opinion on that? Thank you

Wow I must have not turned on the notifier as I just came bk today and saw the thoughtful responses. Thank you!!! True about 55 and panatomic haha I was a crash test dummy for film experimentation and teaching people how to shoot fashion in their kodak seminars. I dont know if the range of fomapan and t55 is identical but bloody close. Regarding T55 as being insant film there is one important misconception. It takes you 30 to 45 minutes to process your film on a jobo tank from start to finish Type 55 if cleared properly and rinsed to be semi archival would rake you a 1/2 day to process and and turn you into an ambulant esoteric gypsy camp on your shooting set with buckets liquids and tupperware and baggies and clotheslines and and and and etc etc which in some cases you have the extra time to deal with.v In some cases you absobloodylootely do not!! Price... Rodinal diluted w an estimated cost if 10 c per sheet . Band H sells a 50 sheet box. of fomapan for about 40-50 . That brings your total cost to about 1.25 tops and which may decrease significantly if you know how to reuse chemicals I got a very detailed heads up at the show that new 55 has made some progress but has a huge gap to bridge from here to the shelves. Nobody knows what its going to look like the cost estimated at circa 6 usd per sheet and nobody knows who the suppliers will ne or its effective speed. The opposite is also true. You now know there is a film which can give u t 55 results at T55 prices of 1995. You know how to develop it in less time than it took to deal with 55 and you can go out and shoot tomorrow. Im a very loyal supporter of film which comes second to being a loyal supporter if my photography practise. When New 55 is made available if it is superior to the fomapan option I will gladly get on board but its been 6 years since Polaroid 55 was discontinued and I alwaysthought the positive was horrible needing ti be coated so Im only interested in a Panatomic type neg .relatively simplified process. and having an option that if i have to shoot an extensive art projekt like a book I will be able to afford it. BTW if you use Fomapan on 810 with an identical dilution you should end up with a lesser kontrast probably a more somber look. Every format is its own animal with its own math. Ei what u light up with kinoflow on 35 and go to 45 and u need hmi to get similar kontrast and tgen go to 810 and u may need defused strobe to get close . But if you are using the same light kontrast then your developer concentration should be higher on a larger format.

Wow I must have not turned on the notifier as I just came bk today and saw the thoughtful responses. Thank you!!! True about 55 and panatomic haha I was a crash test dummy for film rxperimentation and teaching peoplehow to shoot fashion in their kodak seminars. I dont know if the range of fomapan and t55 is identical but bloody close. Regarrding T55 as being insant film there is one important misconception. It takes you 30 to 45 minutes to process your film on a jobo tank from start to finish Type 55 if cleared properly and rinsed to be semi archival would rake you a 1/2 day to process and and turn you into an ambulant esoteric gypsy camp on your shooting set with buckets liquids and tupperware and baggies and clotheslines and and and and etc etc which in some cases you have the extra time to deal with.v In some cases you absobloodylootely do not!! Price... Rodinal diluted w an estimated cost if 10 c per sheet . Band H sells a 50 sheet box. of fomapan for about 40-50 . That brings your total cost to about 1.25 tops and which may decrease significantly if you know how to reuse chemicals I got a very detailed heads up at the show that new 55 has made some progress but has a huge gap to bridge from here to the shelves. Nobody knows what its going to look like the cost estimated at circa 6 usd per sheet and nobody knows who the suppliers will ne or its effective speed. The opposite is also true. You now know there is a film which can give u t 55 results at T55 prices of 1995. You know how to develop it in less time than it took to deal with 55 and you can go out and shoot tomorrow. Im a very loyal supporter of film which comes second to being a loyal supporter if my photography practise. When New 55 is made available if it is superior to the fomapan option I will gladly get on board but its been 6 years since Polaroid 55 was discontinued and I alwaysthought the positive was horrible needing ti be coated so Im only interested in a Panatomic type neg .relatively simplified process. and having an option that if i have to shoot an extensive art projekt like a book I will be able to afford it. BTW if you use Fomapan on 810 with an identical dilution you should end up with a lesser kontrast probably a more somber look. Every format is its own animal with its own math. Ei what u light up with kinoflow on 35 and go to 45 and u need hmi to get similar kontrast and tgen go to 810 and u may need defused strobe to get close . But if you are using the same light kontrast then your developer concentration should be higher on a larger format.

Hi there are you comming to the show? Want to meet? If so contact us thru our FB page https://m.facebook.com/Littman45SingleOpusArteCollection?_rdr

Certainly anticipating the availability of the new 55 film expected by next summer but reluctant to depend solely on something i have no idea which speed and which price and which final result. I was very exited tp learn from some of my clients that Fomapan 100 in rodinal 1/50 can be indistinguishable from the old type 55 minus the funky edges which after 70 years are not so novel . Apps like photoshop for mobile phones have this kind of trick border for selfies . In any event I always sought 55 for its panatomic feel and not for the print which required fixing. I care about the negative and happy there is a currently available film that can be purchased for a dollAr a sheet which brongs me back to 2001 price wise. The second aspect I like is the ability to push and pull and which after developing one sheet could let you tweek a whole job plus i dont have to wait a year. Have you guys had any experience wih it? Thank you.

LITTMAN OPUS+ARTE COLLECTION maintained a .com website littman45single.com from 2001-2012. When all of our cameras became one of a kind custom editions in 2013 the website was no longer useful to our project . This is now the new official and only page to our project https://m.facebook.com/Littman45SingleOpusArteCollection?id=395338467199393&_rdr We have introduced a few new products and a new series of affordable cameras in anticipation to the release of new 55 a a 4x5 film that is an alternative to Polaroid type 55. Also the Littman 34 single which shoots Fuji 100c with considerable gain due ti having perfectible parallelism as well as the worlds first 80 megapixel rangefinder camera powered by Leaf with accurate coupled cropping and rangefinder focusing to 1.5 ft 80 digitar. This will be our one and only announcement All best