richard_volet

Good work, Joe. I put Skew to "0", and everything back to normal! Vuescan was even saving the accidentally altered skew when closing the program.

Thank You, RIchard

Should the 'Skew' slider be at 5?

Thanks Joe, I'll check that "angle" out.

RIchard

When I preview in Vuescan and set the crop lines to the extremities of the negative, an inner dotted line rectangle which is at an angle appears. This inner rectangle is the area the scanner now scans, and no, I can't expand it out and angle it correctly! Please see attached screen shot. I've been using this setup for years and this has never happened before, not will it go away. Any idea. I tried to contact Hamrick, but I can't find the Vuescan.log filemw hicyo need to submit a request fro help. I searched everywhere (Mac OSX 10.6.8) and the file does not exist on my computer. Searched using spotlight and also followed Hamrick's instructions to find the log file.

Thank You, RIchard

Someone wanted to know why I asked this question. I'm thinking of finding one and wanted to know because I have a NIkon Fe, with the same cocking lever on/off switch. I don't like this simply because my right eye is very weak, so using my left eye to peer through the viewfinder, the lever sticks in my face. It does seem redundant, if the shutter button needs to be half depressed to activate the meter (which I think is the case with the fm, though not the fe) Thank you all for your interet and responses

Richard

I know the shutter of a Nikon FM2 or 2N will fire without a battery. My question is: if you want to use without battery and meter, does the film advance knob have to be in the "meter on" half cocked position in order to release the shutter?

Thanks You, Richard

I want to tell anyone looking for good film camera repair about CANADA CAMERA AND PHOTO SERVICES in Montebello California. I can't explain the name for you, but the service is exceptional. In this day and age, as we know, good film camera repair people are hard to find, not to mention the incompetent and dishonest ones.

My Minolta CLE was grossly overexposing on manual settings and occasionally so on auto. I was looking for someone in Canada and the search brought up CANADA CAMERA in California. The YELP reviews were incredibly positive, so I took a chance. I got my camera back very promptly, the problem completely fixed, and for a cost of $150 (US) including the $32 shipping! That is more than reasonable, I would say.

I know very fine Leica repairmen who won't even look at the CLE anymore, so this was fantastic. He apparently works on all types of cameras and I guess if he is this good with a CLE one couldn't go wrong with a Leica ora anything else.

RIchard

I just shot part of a roll of film, later looked at the camera and noticed the exposure compensation was set to +2. Using Delta 400, I usually shoot at e.i. of 250. (The meter was set for speed of 250). I develop in hc-110, dilution H for 12 minutes.

My first thought was to develop at e.i. 125 or 60, accordingly shorter development time. Wondered if pulling as far as 60 would be too much.

Any opinions?

Hello Skeeter. I just read this old post of yours. With my Beseler, mounted to a work bench, I also have the alignment problem (east-west), for which there is no adjustment on the enlarger. I have some shims under one side of my easel which does the trick, using the two mirror/pinhole method. In my case it required quite a lot to align, I'm guessing around 3mm.

Richard

the 23 has a way to align it from front to back, but there is no way to adjust horizontal tilt (as you look at the negative stage from the front). mine has a slight horizontal misalignment compared to the baseboard which is level. i'm not sure if the misalignment is significant. my feeling is that the negative curve with an open carrier is more significant (especially with 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 negs). perhaps a glass negative carrier and better lenses will solve the problem (which, it occurs to me, i never really described...some of my prints seem to not be sharply focused over the entire frame. i haven't been able to determine whether this is an enlarger or lens problem). hey guys thanks for your input. i got more action here in two hours than "over there" in two days.

Thank you for all your replies. I printed again today and went with my first inclination. I did a print at 11 sec. with #1.5 filter and 11 sec with #2 . A final one at 10 sec with #1.5 and 13 sec. with #2 got me just where I wanted it, similar to the scan I posted. I think this is a good simple solution. Maybe in the future I will try local manipulation, or shorter development time. (I did initially try burning in the face a bit, but it still lacked the contrast I wanted with the #1.5 filter; it just darkened)

I have been printing for around five or six years now, and this was the first time I had a negative where I felt the contrast (particularly in the facial tones) sat between two (seemingly very different) 1/2 filter stops. Still seems odd to me.

Thanks again for your interest.

Richard

Thank you all for your very quick replies. Yes, I will try, as I mentioned, doing a split contrast. I'm sure half time at #1.5 and half time at #2 should work.

I was mostly curious if other people sometime find the "in between" zone to be the solution. Usually 1/2 a filter is fairly close; this particular negative just seemed to react with a large difference.

Richard

Here's the a scan of the negative, (which I realize doesn't answer anything). I had to decrease the contrast on the scan a bit. This is about as much contrast as I can personally tolerate in this.

Yesterday I was printing a photo and I found the #1 1/2 filter was not enough contrast, while the #2 was too much? At least with this given negative it seems like a large difference. I thought I could try half the exposure with each? Has anyone had a similar problem and done that, or found other solutions?

Richard

<p>Hello. I just got an old Paterson System 4 two reel tank. The spring collar is missing. Will that work OK without it? The instructions say the collar "prevents the reel from moving". The reel is fixed securely on the centre column. Without the collar the column moves slightly. Seems to me that shouldn't matter?<br>

<br />Richard</p>

<p>I had been shooting Ilford Delta 400 at e.i. 250 (my usual film/ei choice), when I shot a roll of Ilford Delta 100 and forgot to change the ISO setting on my camera. So I have exposed the roll of Delta 100 at e.i. 250.<br>

I use HC-110, dilution B as my regular developer. Ilford suggests 8 minutes for e.i. 200. and 6 minutes at 100.<br>

Any advice for my roll at e.i. 250? 9 minutes?<br>

Thank you from first time poster, Richard</p>