stephen_willard

The biggest problem I have with DOF charts is estimating distance such as 171.45 feet of 97.34 feet. I have never been very good at that stuff. Wide angle lenses are not a problem. It the longer lenses that are hard to estimate DOF. While looking at a sporting good catalog I noticed that they have some very good range finders that can also function as binoculars (sp). Nikon makes one which weighs 10 oz and can provide measurements form 30' to 2400'.

 

<p>

 

Is this a silly thing to consider? Has anyone every resorted to using such a tool in the field? Or perhaps using Polaroid type 55 film and louping the negative to check for sharpness is sufficient (which is what I currently do now with varing degrees of success).

Mac,

 

<p>

 

I am interested in buying one. Perhaps you could outline the specs

for us who have not been able to get our hands on the literature. I

plan on packing it in so weight is an issure and temperatures where I

go can vary from 30 to 80 degrees. Processing and exposing my

Polaroid film has always been problematic for me. Perhaps this new

holder will help?

 

<p>

 

Thanks

-Steve

I have a 65mm, 75mm, and 120mm lens and I do not use center filters.

Here are my reasons:

 

<p>

 

1. They are very expensive.

 

<p>

 

2. They add time, errors, and complexity to calculating exposures.

Ease of use, speed, and simplicity are very important to me when

shooting at twilight.

 

<p>

 

3. I can correct for the fall off in the darkroom.

 

<p>

 

4. In most cases I like the effect the fall off adds to the

composition. In generally, it is only noticable in skys and tends to

pull the eye toward the center. It is very rare that I dodge the

corners to correct for light fall off.

 

<p>

 

Hope this helps.

1. Polaroid film will not work with the Readyload holder.

 

<p>

 

2. You can use Readyload film in the 545i for wide angle shots because

you have a large depth of focus with these lenses. This will over

come the film flattness problem to some extent.

 

<p>

 

3. If you what to get real sharp negatives then you must use the

Readyload holder and make modifications to it. To see where the

offset varies on the holder use a tooth pick and a straight edge and

take depth measuremets with the film in place and the paper film cover

retracted. You will have to take the holder apart and do some filing

to fix it.

 

<p>

 

3. I use Readyloads exclusively. They completely eliminate dust which

was a big problem for me and could result 50% waste. They also free

me up from having to pack film holders, film changing tents, and

different boxes for storing exposed film of different contacted

development times. I simply write the development times (N, N-1,

N-2..) on the paper cover. It reduce my weight considerably and I do

not have to spend time cleaning, loading and unloading film. These

attributes of Readyloads are important to me because I shoot most of

my stuff in remote areas (using a llama) for many weeks at a time.

 

<p>

 

4. I use Polaroids extensively. Sometimes I may take as many as 10

Polaroids to formulate one composition. Polaroids help me discover

unwanted elements of the composition in the field where I can make

corrections. They allow me to properly crop my images in the field so

that I do not have to make excessive enlargements in the darkroom. I

bring a marker to write on them for recording all my notes and

thoughts. I mark the zone placement of each area right on the

Polaroid. I record the lens used and exposures applied. I record all

camera movements. I note expected results and the theme and mood I am

looking for. I use the negative (type 55) to check for sharpness.

Polaroids allow me to inspect the composition for dodging and

burning. Sometimes I will make a minor change to make dodging and

burning easier. I take all of my polaroids in midday marking the

tripod placement for each composition. I will then revist the site

that evening or the following morning. By the time I am ready to use

wet film there is no quessing or surprises. I have an intimate

understanding of what I have to do and the kind of light I need.

After I take the shot I tape the Polaroid to the Readyload. Many

months later in middle of winter my Polaroid print and notes will tell

me exactly what I have to do in the darkroom to make the final image

come true as I had invisioned it in the field.

 

<p>

 

Hope this helps.

Then there are those of us who are better then the rest of you because

we never forget to bring the meter or the camera. Its the film that

we leave behind!

Bill, Here is my two cents worth on this subject. Two years ago I

talked with a Nikon technician and he told me that their telephone

lenses for large format cameras were optimized for use at infinity

only. Anything closer than infintity was not recommended because of

the deterioration in resolution and accutance (sp).

 

<p>

 

I have not done any close up work, but if I were then I would get a

meter that is designed to read off the ground glass. This would

eliminate managing the bellows factor, and I believe would provide you

with very accurate readings.

 

<p>

 

Well that is all I have to say. Hope this helps.

 

<p>

 

By the way, I would really be interested on what you are using to

stablize your camera when shooting with those big lenses.

I just purchased a used one. Prior to this I relied my JOB CPP2 rinse

cycle to wash my 4x5 color negatives. When I placed the negatives in

a tray to treat them with stabilizer, the negatives would turn the

stabilizer pink. Since I have started washing the negative for 8

minutes using the Gravity Works film washer and the 4x5 adapter, my

stabilizer does not turn pink anymore. I suspect this is a good

indicator that it is doing a better job than the Jobo wash and flush

cycle procedure.

 

<p>

 

Hope this helps.

Niether Calumet or B&H carry it even thouh they both advertize it.

B&H has a limited stock of Pro 100 in Readyloads and Kodak is

considering NOT replacing it with Portra. I ended up buy a two year

supply of Pr0 100 from B&H just in case. This confusion has been going

on for about a year thanks to Kodak. I have called Kodak and

registered a formal protest about the need for color negative film in

Readyloads. You may want to do the same.

 

<p>

 

IF you call Kodak they will tell that Portra will be distributed as

soon as the Pro 100 stock is depleted. I did talk to one salesmen who

told me off the record they may not be producing Portra or any other

color negative film in Readyloads. He entered my complaint in a

database. So, should you call Kodak, insist on having them create a

formal reord of your need for a CN film in Readyloads, otherwise they

will blow you off.

I am investigating easier and faster ways of doing RA4 color printing. Currently, I am using the JOBO CPP-2 tube processor and find it to be too much work. It would be nice to purchase a fully automatic paper processor such as a Fujimoto cp51 or the JOBO ATL 2500, but I am not willing to spend that much at this time. I am looking at purchasing a Jobo Nova system for processing up to 16x20 prints, and then doing the 20x24 prints on my CPP-2 using the 3063 tube. I sell about three times as many 16x20s as I do 20x24s. Has anybody had any experience with the Novas? Here are some of my concerns:

 

<p>

 

1. The temperature at the top of the vertical slots will be different then at the bottom. This will result in uneven development of the paper.

 

<p>

 

2. My darkroom actually resides in an outside closet that is heated by a space heater so ambient temperatures will vary widely.

 

<p>

 

3. With the JOBO tube processor I use fresh chemistry with each shoot. This has resulted in repeatable predictable printing. How do you manage replenishing with a slot processor? Is processing repeatable?

 

<p>

 

I am also open to any other possibilities except for labs because I can never get the quality I need.

 

<p>

 

 

~

~

I agree with Howard about alignment problems between the film plane

and ground glass plane. Fast lenses and long lens both have very

shallow depth of focus and are very sensitive to any missalignment

(sp) between the two planes.

Mamameea.... I use the Nikkor T 720mm and my yeilds are about 50%.

Camera vibration is a biggy. Depth of focus is another. I always

shoot at f64. If you talk with a Nikon representative he will tell

you the lenses are optiomize for infinity. Any thing shorter or

longer than that will be soft. When I get everything right I have

found the lens to be razor sharp. To be truthful with you Bill I

would say using the 1200mm lens is beyond my abilities. Good luck!

Bill, the double side tape appeals to me. Simple, inexpensive, and

light weight. I used to use the tape to hold down my paper on the

easel unitl I go a vacuum easel. It worked great.

Bill, I have been using the same device each year to validate my

shutters prior to starting the summer season. I do not have my

numbers with me at work, but I have found very little variation from

year to year. I also noticed that long shutter speeds were more

accurate than shorter ones. Sometimes I would get a 30% error, but

most were around 5% (I think). I do not put much value in this test

because I cannot remember when I shot a scene shorter than 1 sec.

 

<p>

 

I have just purchased a pronter timer that connects to the shutter

using Bulb. It ranges from 2-32 seconds. B&H sells them for $650. I

got mine from ebay for $62 used. I am real excited about this because

trying to watch the flower movements in the wind and your rist watch

at the same time can be a hit or miss experience. This will free my

eye up to focus exclusively on the vegetation and will provide me with

more consistant exposures.

I use Fujiflex paper which is part of the Crysrtal Archival family.

It is the super gloss version and produce extremely sharp photographs

with brillant colors that rival Cibrachrome. I do my own developing,

and I know of no commerical lab that uses it. Fujiflex is a very high

contrast paper and requires more dodging and burning to make a print.

Perhaps that is why most labs do not use it. It has a big price tag

too costing 3-4 time more than most other papers. Personally, I find

the shear brilliance of clarity and colors well worth it despite these

short comings.

Bill, here is something else to consider that is not directly related

to the discussion, but I feel is important and can impact the

sharpness of the final print produced. The general discussion

implicitly assumes all premium papers are equal. This is most

definitely not the case.

 

<p>

 

The surface characteristics of the paper can have a large impact on

the sharpness of the photograph. From my test matt and luster

finishes will produce a image that is less sharp then glossy. Equally

important is how smooth is the paper surface. Fiber based papers and

resin coated papers I have found to be course and too rough for my

needs. Papers made of opaque asetate (sp) backing are extremely

smooth and can produce amazingly sharp images. I suspect that is why

most films use this material (in translucent form) as well. The Fuji

Super Gloss papers (Fujiflex) are made of acetate. My 16x20s using

Fujiflex "appear" to be sharper than any of the 8x10s I have made

using RC papers such as Kodak Portra and Ultra. There "appears" to be

little or no degradation in image sharness between my 16x20s and

20x24s using Fujiflex papers.

 

<p>

 

Here is an easy test you can do to validate my claims. Take a sheet

of Fujiflex paper and hold in front of you adjusting it until you

catch a reflection. You will quickly see a clear mirror like image.

Now try this with other kinds of paper and see what you get. I suspect

you will be very surprised to see just how "poor" the other papers

perform. Of course, you should make some prints as well to convince

yourself that spending 3-6 times more for Fujiflex papers is worth it.

 

<p>

 

Hope this helps.

I have the 4550 with the color head. I print 8x10s to 20x24s on a

regular basis with it. I have never owned anything else so it would

be hard for me to judge when compared to other enlargers. I have no

complaints about it. It is solid, smooth, and its get the job done.

 

<p>

 

I do a lot of localized color corrections with my prints. This

requires me to adjust the color pack for each dodge/burn exposure I

make. I have never had the head move while I adjusted the color pack.

My prints are always very sharp.

I use Fuji Supergloss for printing 4x5 color negative films. I get

more comments about the paper. Many people ask me if it is

Cibrachrome. Most believe I am shooting with transparencies. The

colors are rich, primary, and saturated. They also enhance the

sharpness of the print. I have had some ask me if I was using 8x10

format.

 

<p>

 

Currently, all Fuji Crystal Archival papers are consider to have the

best achival attributes for displaying including Cibrachrome.

 

Draw back to the papers are they scratch easily, and they are very

high contrast. I believe the papers can only record up to 3 stops of

light that provide sufficient detail. I suspect the latter will be

worse with type R papers. So plan on doing d&b and masking. The

papers are also very expensive. I just bought a box of 50 sheet of

20x24 and believe I payed $300. Not cheap.

 

<p>

 

Despite the negatives, it is the only paper I would ever consider

using.

I am assuming you are using color materials when you say

transparencies. If this is the case then it is important to know that

most, if not all, color film materials are made of organic dyes that

will show measurable deterioration within two years. After that

things can get real bad real quick. To arrest any degradation in

color film it is best to freeze the film. Frozen film will retain its

original densities even after 100 years.

 

<p>

 

Clearly, the film must be placed in an air tight plastic bag when

freezing them. This will allow you to remove the film from cold

storage without condensation forming on the film's surface. After the

film has warmed to room temperature you can remove it form the bag for

whatever needs you have. When placing the film in cold storage, it is

important that you do it on a day with sufficient humidity (above 50%

I think) in the air. Froozen film packed in dry air can under some

circumstances cause the emulsion to crack.

Here are some things to consider:

 

<p>

 

1) Your observation that it is worse at f/45 then f/16 is

predictable. Smaller f-stops means longer exposures and if there are

light leaks (which are independent of the lens openning) you can

expect they will be more pronounced.

 

<p>

 

2) If you have a standard film holder try it and see if the leak

still presists. If it does not then there is something wrong with the

film holder. If it does then it is either how the film holder mates to

the camera body or the camera body itself.

 

<p>

 

3) To test for proper seating to the camera body insert the Fuji film

holder and then with light tight tape, tape all seams of the film

holder to the body. Now shoot a sheet of film and see if there are

still leaks. There are two possiblities:

 

<p>

 

3.a) If so then the leak is in the camera body or maybe in the film

holder itself. Now tape all camera seams that are applicable for the

nature of the light leaks and do a test shoot. If the leak still is

present then it is the film holder. If not then it is in the camea

body. Remove tape from one seam at a time on the camera body followed

by a test shoot until you identify the seam that is causing the

problem.

 

<p>

 

3.b) If there is no leak then the leak is ocurring at one of the

seams of the film holder. Remove tape from one seam at a time

followed by a test shoot until you identify the seam that is causing

the problem.

 

<p>

 

If the light leak is found to be a seam from the camera body or the

film holder what you can do about it depends on the nature of the

beast. If it is in the film holder then in total darkness use a small

flash light with the film holder loader with scrap film and the slide

pulled back. Shine the light from different directions until you can

locate what seam in the film holder that is causing the leak.

 

<p>

 

Hope this helps. By the way I live just up the street from you in

Fort Collins, CO

To determine negative film speed I use an ISO that produces a 0.10

density unit above film fog for the red reading only. You do not have

to worry about the Zone VIII placement for setting the slope of your

characteristic curve. This is because color negative film is

developed at its maximum contrast at 3:15 at 38 dc. This is, if you

increase the development time or exposure time the curve will not

increase in slope. The curve will move up evenly from toe to

shoulder increasing in overall density, but the slope will not change

(which means you cannot do expanded development like you can with B&W

films). So determine your film speed as noted and develop normally

and measure your Zone III density and that is what is supposed to

be.

 

<p>

 

I have developed a complete CC for Kodak Pro 100 negative film and

found it could record between 10 and 11 stops with almost a perfect

straight line CC. This is amazing because I have never seen any B&W

films perform this well. I have also been very successful at doing

N-1 and N-1.5 contracted development without color shift instability.

At N-2 instability was noted but whether the human eye could actually

detect it, I do not know because I never did any field work at N-2.

Unfortunately, Pro 100 has been discontinued and replaced by Portra. I

will be testing this film and the Fuji negative films this winter. I

pray that they can perform as good as the Pro 100 has.

 

<p>

 

Hope this helps.

I use the Nikkor 500mm, and 720mm lenses and three out of four

photographs I shoot are very sharp. Here is what I do:

 

<p>

 

1. I use the cheapest lightest tripod Bogen makes because I

pack all my gear into remote areas. I have attached a hook to

the bottom of my center post to hang a rock bag from. I usually place

between five and ten pounds of rock in it. Hooking a rock bag

to the tripod legs is not good enough.

 

<p>

 

2. I have developed a method to insure my loupe really does

focus on the camera side of the GG. I mark the setting on my

loupe with red paint. I recalibrate each winter.

 

<p>

 

3. I have gone to great lengths to make sure that my GG focus plane is

perfectly aligned with the film plane. I never do any lens tilts with

these lens because some part of the picture will always go soft on me

if I do.

 

<p>

 

4. I bought some 1/8 inch bungy cord at a mountain shop and tied both

ends together with a backpack pull to from a large loop. I attach one

end of the bungy loop to the front standard. I then run the cord

underneath the tripod neck between the legs and attach the other end

to the back standard. I draw the cord tight using the backpack pull to

form a triangular bow in tension. Between the rock bag and the buggy

cord I have a solid platform.

 

<p>

 

5. I always use the smallest stop the lens has which is f/64. The

lenses are optimized at infinity so that is where I focus. I limit

them to big grand senics (sp) at infinity.

 

<p>

 

6. I try to use around a 10 second exposure which eliminates any

movement that the shutter may cause.

 

<p>

 

7. I use a very flexible 40 inch cable release and pray for calm.

Very slowly I take up any slack in the release just before I plan to

shoot. I then release the cable as slowly and smoothly as I can.

 

<p>

 

8. After I load the camera with film and cock the shutter I wait at

between 30-60 sec for any vibrations to stop before I shoot.

 

<p>

 

Hope this helps.

Here is something to consider before you replace your lens with

another only to find it too may be equally fuzzy. Are you sure the

problem is a lens problem and not an alignment problem between the

focus plane and the film plane. The longer the lens the more percise

those two planes need to aligned. Short lens have a very large depth

of focus while long lens have a very short depth of focus. For my

system it became apparent that all my lenses under 500mm were

extremely sharp including my Nikkon 300mm M lens. The minute I

rsorted to using the 500mm or 720mm lens things started to go soft at

enlargements greater the 11x14.

 

<p>

 

I then ordered two dozen brand new film holders. I took the back off

my camera and measured the focus screen offset from the camera side of

the camera back using a tooth pick, a ruler, and a cloths pin to

attach the tooth pick to the ruler. I inserted each film holder with

a scap piece of film in it and used my crude tooth pick and ruler tool

to see if the holder had the same offset. The first 10 that were

properly aligned I kept and I returned the rest. It was amazing how

many that did not match including most of my old ones.

 

<p>

 

My 500mm and 720mm lens now produce very sharp images. In fact, I

just did a 20x24 print photgraphed with my 720mm lens and it is quite

impressive how sharp and clear the image is.

 

<p>

 

Hope this helps.

I beleive all the cameras you are looking at are very good cameras

although I have not used any except the Wisner. I cannot tell you if

your concern is justified about the Wisner, but I can speak of my own

personal experiences with the camera.

 

<p>

 

I have owned the Wisner 4x5 Expedition for four years now. It still

looks brand new. I shoot primarily landscapes of the Colorado

mountains at 10,000 and above which is at or above tree line. I shoot

year round using skiies and tents in the winter, and llamas and big

back packs the rest of the time. It has been subject to extreme UV

radition, temperatures below -20, and violent storms of rain, hail,

sleet and snow. Large humidity and temperatures changes are typical.

One time in September I arrived at my destination in shorts with no

shirt and within a 30 miuntes the temperature dropped to 15 degress.

By the next morning there was 10 inches of snow on the ground. I have

never had any of my movements stick or lockup on me in the four years

I have owned the camera.

 

<p>

 

My llama preferrs to jump across streams rather than walk across them.

He is a wimp when it comes to getting his feet wet. I have often

argued that the reason I do not have dust or movement problems is

because of my llama`s olympian leaps which shake the dust out of my

gear and realigns all my camera movements.

 

<p>

 

My lenses range from 65mm to 720mm, and the camera has full movements

on both the front and back standards. The back standard movements may

be restricted when compared to a studio camera, but I have found them

to be sufficient for my application. It weighs around 4.2 pounds

which is my biggest complaint, it is too heavy. I plan on buying

the Wisner Pocket Expedition soon which weighs around 3.6 pounds. I

will be using my current camera as a backup and storing it in my

Montero for quick retieval.

 

<p>

 

Good luck!

I hope to start experimenting with unsharp masking with color negative film. I plan on using TMax 100 b&w film for the mask and I have a color enlarging head. Does anybody have any ideas how I can zero out the orange mask that is found on most color negative films? Another way of viewing this is how can adjust the light source (which includes the orange cast of the negative) so that it is daylight balanced. I do not have access to a color temperature meter.

Does anyone know of any publications that provide instructions on how to mask color negative film that have a large contrast range. That is, types of films and methods to use.