danny_rowton

<p>Excellent David. Thanks so much. </p>

<p>Hi David. Oh I assumed they provide only an all in one service where you have to have their £130 frames as part of the package. Oh, well thats great! I think I only clicked on the link where they were showing the 4 stage service of print, mount, frame etc...</p>

<p>Hi David. This too is really valuable information to me. I was impressed by the print space's site. Alas, for a first ever solo, I wont have yet garnered the requisite momentum to be charging clients the price necessary for me to profit from sales if I used the print space's services. I'm not based in London! (perhaps you aren't either, but as beautiful a job as your contact appear to do, I have to find something more cost effective) <br>

However, my overriding feeling upon reading your contribution to this thread is one of sincere gratitude because I have learned something, as I did with the other posts. </p>

<p>Thats great John. Thanks for your advice, which I think I have to take!<br>

I am in England and mpix are American but I can start making enquiries over here. Thanks.</p>

Thanks for the responses so far

guys. Interesting. I should

clarify the prints are being

produced for my first solo

exhibition. I will be

purposefully using anti

reflective glass in the frames

as, on some images featured, if

not most, there is scope for the

'look' to be almost painting-like

which is something I have been

keen to accomplish succesfully.

<p>I need to print quite a lot of slide film images and wondered which paper to use. I wondered if I I could ask your experiences of this - which paper worked well, and which didn't. All I know (or think I do) is that I dont think something remotely glossy will work. <br>

The images will all be printed from digital files, are all shot on expired Fuji Tungsten 64 (well stored. Any that weren't simply wont make the cut) The whole project has been night time exterior urban landscapes so there is a relatively large amount of dark areas involved and this can be a challenge in itself to get right. All images were shot on Medium Format and Im going to be printing various sizes, A2 down to A4 size.<br>

I do not have a printer at the moment, so this will have to be taken on by a reputable company (I have one in mind already that I used before with excellent results, but that wasn't from slide film images)<br>

Thanks for reading.</p>

 

<p>Hi<br>

Thanks for the responses.<br>

OS is Windows 8.<br>

Epson are now telling me they dont have stock to replace what I have. The plot thickens...</p>

<p>I am about to have my Epson v600 scanner replaced for a 2nd time (so 3 in total) because of line issues on my film scans.<br>

Its the usual green or purple-ish coloured lines that are the cause of frustration. <br>

Epson refused an upgrade to v700 after I asked them as I have zero confidence in the v600 (though appreciate the same issue is on some forums for the v700. I just dont know what else to suggest) I advised them I would be happy to contribute the cost difference. <br>

I ensure the relevant areas are dust free, but this problem is too frequent to be just dust. I have tried un-installing and reinstalling, and everything I have in my set up is to Epson's satisfaction that it is mutually compatible. <br>

The first replacement was a recon, and the 2nd one will be too, which I advised them I wasnt happy about but will have to accept. Then again, the first one was apparently brand new and of course I got the same issue.<br>

I just dont know what else to do. I would love to invest in something more reliable but funds are limited, though if I knew something that would definitely give me great scans and no line issue then I would consider anything within reason. This is deeply unsatisfactory and very time consuming.<br>

Any constructive ideas (aside from throwing the scanner out the window!) would be greatly appreciated.</p>

<p>I want to buy the 200 / 4 but want to ensure its the 5 lens element one (the last one compatible with the P67) This particular lens also had a 77mm thread. <br>

How do I tell that one from the older models? I cant seem to find a serial number document that makes this information clear in the same way for example the old Nikon lenses did. <br>

Thanks</p>

Hi Brooks. As stated I do not develop it myself so Im limited in

chemical answers. It will be EXACTLY the same chemicals as

other films that do not have the problem. I only EVER get this

issue with Efke. Once in my possession, all my films are stored in

my fridge, not just Efke. All films. Everything is exactly the same.

 

The only clue Ive got is from what others have said about Efke

820IR and that is it didnt have the highest quality control at the

factory. I dont know if this was a contributing factor to its closure.

Quite possibly.

Hi. This is on the neg so black in hard form (though too small to

see with the naked eye usually) or white once scanned.

Its not the camera or scanner or anything else for that matter

because this only ever happens with Efke. Its very frustrating as

aside from this issue, I love this film, but its getting to the point

where I might have to sell what I have left (cant return as faulty

because its not fresh stock / been discontinued)

<p>Hi<br>

I get absolutely loads of tiny white specs on my 35mm format rolls of this film and it takes hours to clean it up. I have just bought a Pentax 67 but have only run two rolls through that and havent tried Efke in 120 yet. I generally use a Hoya infrared screw in filter but sometimes a Cokin IR filter, but either way the same thing happens. Processing is through Xtol but not by me (yet).<br>

I admit I haven't tried using a red filter, but thats because I have read that this is not the optimum filtration to bring out the best from the film. I appreciate the film is now discontinued but only last year (2014) so I dont think this issue is related to expiry dates.<br>

The aura effects of Efke are excellent, but it has to be said its actual overall 'quality' was somewhat lacking, and its supposed fine grain of 100 is quite frankly a joke when compared to the smooth grain of Rollei's ISO 400 IR film. That said, it can be a pretty close relation to the also discontinued HIE, if only it weren't snowing in every photograph....</p>

 

<p>By the way, all films were fine. In case anybody reads this in years to come.<br>

If youre interested I flew from Gatwick to Inverness and back again. </p>

<table>

<tbody>

<tr valign="top">

<td>

<p>Hi<br />I just got my first 67 and cannot wait to get shooting with it.<br />I read a lot about MF in general before deciding on the 67 being the right step up from 35mm for me. <br />I watched online videos and read the manual several times. Then I 'went live' and started to practice a few operations eg cheating the camera into thinking it has film so I can test the shutter, mirror lock up etc.<br />The issue is I am fairly sure I followed the method of how to turn the exposure counter dial anti clockwise, but now the counter doesnt work at all even with film. <br />I would be very grateful of any tips on how to resolve this as I am now very concerned it is broken. The exposure counter dial (the tiny piece of plastic in the centre of the main counter area that the win on lever is attached to) is moving freely unlike before when there was resistance unless the necessary downward pressure is applied.</p>

</td>

</tr>

</tbody>

</table>

Thanks for the pic Matthew. I am officially 'on the lookout' for

similar at the right price. I do need a more robust tripod anyway

really. Mine is ok and obviously I can add ballast in the middle

but it's a stepping stone. I'm also a film user. You can pick up

the fisheye's cheaper if like me your prepared to take one that's

a bit battle scarred (but optically clean) & without a case. I was

looking for months and months and got there in the end.

P'S It's ok. I'm not a novice. I use the F and F2 and I'm all pre Ai

at the minute.

Thanks for the advice guys. Its a real old one. Definitely the

original version. It's not AI'D but I don't want AI anyway. It's

pretty used and in average cosmetic condition but I've seen

shots which I asked the seller to send me and it seems

optically flawless which is what the seller described it as. I

think we know where this is heading...

Hi. I'm a film user and wondered if anybody out there would

know if the slight loss when using a teleconverter is significant

in the title scenario compared to the old 105 / 2.5.

For portraits, as I don't shoot them that often, I currently get by

with the normal lens with the teleconverter but there's a prime

105 up for grabs for a good price and I wondered if the 105

would offer improvement.

Hi guys and thank you for your responses, all of which were

very helpful. Matthew, I must confess it didn't even occur to me

to simply mount the camera backwards! I may not need a new

tripod after all. Though I do want the boom mic style option.

What that's for is I have a vintage Nikkor 7.5mm fisheye and I

need to get everything away from it as it picks up 180 degree

field of view. Beautiful old thing. Food for thought. Cheers guys.

Does anybody out there know of a cost effective option for

tripods where I can get my camera to be held out like a boom

mic but still be secured from tipping over at the legs? Also

want to be able to get the camera perfectly flat facing the sky

straight up (for long exposures). My Manfrotto doesn't allow

this as it is.

I think I need a tripod with a rotating centre column.

<p>Hi<br>

I know this is a common question but I dont know what to do for the best and wondered if anybody (ideally UK based photographers) has flown internally and what their experience was like with the security and xrays?<br>

I'm flying from London to Inverness to shoot mainly IR in the Highlands of Scotland. I know that going through security I need to put the films in my hand luggage, NOT THE SUITCASE! But now Im wondering if I should have the film sent to the Landlord of the place Im staying at (if hes OK with that), shoot it, and then post it back to myself before I fly back thus avoiding Customs completely. I assume it will be driven on the land back down South and wont be flown back to London and still go through Customs anyway!?<br>

Im fretting a bit as I would be heartbroken if there is damage to the films. I have never gone through Customs with IR film before. Im using Efke 820IR, EIR (expired 2007) and Aerochrome.<br>

Any ideas ladies and gents?</p>

<p>I would definitely process the exposed one and use the unused one (Or contact me and I will buy it off you!)<br>

I mean, arent you curious to see it? There could be some total gems...<br>

If youre in the UK, contact www.johnsalimphotographic.co.uk<br>

He is great and does all my B&W and E6.</p>

 

<p>Hi Alan. I would be interested to know the outcome when you got the results processed. How was it, do you recall?</p>

<p>OK gentlemen, I thank you sincerely for your interesting and helpful comments.<br>

This has made a difference to me because I was looking to ship it, but now you've convinced me that these rolls are worth shooting myself.<br>

E6 isnt an issue for me. A local man has his own lab does it for just under a fiver a roll here in the UK and so he has become a friend. I scan and tidy at home. </p>

<p>I bought a small lot of expired 35mm slide this week. It was only because there was a roll of EIR in there, the price was right, and I truly love that film. The other 5 films were Sensia. 3 rolls of 100 and 2 of 400 neither of which I have ever used before. This is a wildcard purchase as the seller didnt buy it new, so who knows wheres its been living this past 10 or 15 years. Still, I am prepared for the risk with EIR as its so rare now.<br>

I am wondering whether to shoot the Sensia myself or not, and ask if anybody has any advice? Firstly, from what I have read Sensia seems to be not as good as Velvia though before discontinuation was similarly priced. These rolls are about 10-12 years old (Expiry average is around 2004).<br>

Should I add a stop due to its age? Having said that, it can be best to underexpose by one stop with slide in some circumstances and of course there are narrow latitude margins. If I use it and don't instead sell, it would end up being for landscapes I would've thought. </p>