tony_brent

I use an HP Combi tank, and have yet to spill a drop. There are some

rubber washers that have to be in place, and the lid needs to be

pressed down all the way around.

<p>

I get nice even skies, repeatable development, easy (for me) to use.

Fill/empty time is about 45 seconds, which isnt bed for half a gallon

of liquid. Just include it in the overall processing time.

Since when I shoot film I use Grafmatic magazines, the six-shot

capacity of the tank is a perfect match for the Grafmatic.

When you shop for a lab make sure to tell them you are talking about

4x5 film. Not all of them do, even though their ads say that they

process "professional" film (that usually means 120)

Another thing you might try is a screw extractor that you can find in

tool shops. It is made like a tap, but the twist is in the unscrewing

direction. Get a tap holder for it, and find one that fits snugly in

the 1/4" hole. It has a series of ridges that grab the sides of the

hole and hopefully unscrew the stuck piece.

<p>

They may have glued that thing in there. In that case you're just

going to have to wrestle with it.

Looking around, I guess that is a new film that I am not familiar

with. sorry I cant help you. Let me know what you come up with. I may

want to try some.

My Calumet Cadet came with a reducer in the 3/8 tripod block. It has

two slots in the edge for a spanner wrench or a wide flat blade screw

driver. Does yours? If so, sacrifice a screwdriver and carefully file

or grind it until it fits EXACTLY. Clamp in a vise and try to keep the

screwdriver from slipping because the reducer is probably soft brass

and will burr up easily if it slips.

<p>

The alternative if you have a drill press is to mount the block and

use a drill that is bigger than the 1/4 threads but smaller than the

3/8 threads and drill it out. A friend with a small machine shop could

help here.

<p>

I modified my Berlebach by drilling out the 3/8 stud and making a

loose mounting bolt that drops down inside the head. It was a project

though. It involved some lathe work.

Just a thought, but make sure you have the right side of the film

packet facing the lens. This is the side with the cross hair in the

circle. Otherwise, the outer envelope will pull all the way off when

you pull it to expose the negative.

<p>

If you look at the end of the envelope nearest the metal end clip you

will a see a raised white strip of cardboard. This catches inside the

end of the holder and keeps the envelope from coming apart.

<p>

You do all the loading and exposing with the lever in the L position.

Only move it to P when you are ready to process.

<p>

The suggestion to blow a film and take it all apart is a good one.

Hold the metal clip with your fingers and pull the twin tabs at the

other end until it separates. You can also see how the release catch

operates in the holder.

<p>

Feel free to e-mail for more detailed info. I shoot almost exclusively

Polaroid 4x5 and 8x10 and have very few mishaps any more, although I

did go through a learning period.

Most of the time I use 4 jaw chuck in the lathe and check for size

often. I think that a GOOD quality hole saw (Starret, etc -- not a

cheap import) that is close to but not larger than the required size

would give the cleanest result in the wood board.

<p>

This is a round tube with saw teeth on one end that mounts in an

adapter with a pilot drill. Put the whole works in the drill press,

center up the board, clamp it firmly and cut slowly.

<p>

Dont use the version that has a number of different rings in a slotted

base. They are flimsy and wont work cleanly.

Unless there was a change, I thought that Pan X referred to Panatomic

X, the fine grain film that was rated about 32 ASA. Plus X is a ASA

125 film. I think they quit making Panatomic some time ago, which may

be the reason for the cold storage.

<p>

I would guess that if you give it good exposure for the shadows and

test a couple of rolls to get the development for the highlights, you

ought to be OK.

Seiko's are decent shutters. They are the Japanese copy of the Compurs

and Syncro-Compurs. They are well made and not that bad to work on.

Any repairman that knows Compurs likely also knows Seiko's or will be

able to find his way around one with no trouble.

I have to go with static too. What you are seeing, if this is indeed

what's happening, is a record of little lightning bursts across the

surface of your film. Dry conditions (winter weather, heated dry

rooms, etc) are the prime causes. You know how you get a spark off the

end of your finger when you touch the refrigerator door after

shuffling across the carpet? Same idea. You can see the spark clearly

in a dark room; so can the film.

Both are just boxes to keep the light side outside and the film side

inside. As long as the bellows are tight and everything works, get the

one that feels best and concentrate on equipping it with a complement

of the best glass you can afford.

<p>

That said, I used the Graphic View II all through the Navy, and found

the same rig after I got out. It is a bit more limited in its

movements, but I never found anything I couldn't do with it.

<p>

The Calumet is a good machine too. I have never used it but I believe

there are folks here who have.

I cant tell you much about the fancy plexiglass models, other than

they are all supposed to a good job, but cost most of your monthly

income.

<p>

I still get by very nicely with an old Kodak tray Siphon. I have done

dye tests to see just how completely it flushes a tray full of water,

and it is a very efficient -- and economical -- device, although they

may be hard to find.

<p>

As long as you dont crowd the tray, and remember to shuffle the prints

around and from top to bottom every few minutes it will wash to

archival standards.

A bit off the topic, but I once landed a nice little bit of freelance

work because I happened to be carrying my Speed Graphic in the right

place at the right time. See my article in Odds and Ends in the parent

site for this forum.

She may want to think about a Speed Graphic. I have gotten pretty good

at hand holding mine. I just dont have the legs to carry a big tripod

any more. I like to use the rangefinder. Plus they can be used to prod

bears away.

I have been going with the direct from the thick concentrate approach

for years with good consistent results at 1:31 also. I use a small

medicine cup that is marked at 1/2 oz and 1 oz. Just right for either

1 pint or 1 quart tanks. I add about half the water and use the rest

to rinse the cup thoroughly to get it all dissolved.

It's been a while since I fired one of those off, but I would be

willing to bet the numbers refer to milliseconds of delay. 0 for X

sync, and different delays for different flashbulb types. (A common

setting was about 20 ms)

If you can get it on a lens board and have enough bellows to focus you

can use just about anything on a Speed Graphic, because it has the

back shutter. The bellows draw is about 12 1/4" so that places a limit

on how long a lens you can use.

<p>

The only catch is that you will have to readjust or install a proper

cam for the rangefinder depending on which make you have.

I have'nt used the Ilford, but it is a good film. As for filters,

about all I can tell you is that it will lighten its own color and

darken its complementary, so a yellow would lighten yellow and

yellow-orange and darken blue. I have taken to using a #23 light green

for a lot of my foliage stuff. It keeps the bluish shadows much more

open than a yellow, but I dont have any bright colored flowers in them

so I cant say for sure.

First you might make some contact prints (4x5 you said?) They will be

big enough to evaluate your lighting, just in case. From there you

should know if it is processing or your enlarger. If it is bad

processing you should probably look at your agitation technique. I use

the HP Combi tank and a gentle once-over inversion every minute -- my

skies and even-toned subjects come out nice and smooth. If it seems to

be the enlarger, check that your condensers are installed properly. If

that checks out, check the alignment to make sure everything is

parallel. As far as the lens goes, if it is a decent make of the right

focal length for 4x5 (135-150mm or so) Then I'm not sure what to tell

you.

1: I prefer the Alden. It uses a rotating light trap so nothing

touches the film if you have it loaded correctly. I have used the

Lloyd's, but after a period of use, it would build up grit in the felt

light trap and scratch. Drove me nuts figuring out what was going on.

<p>

2: I use a stainless tank and reels. I hold the center of the reel

between my thumb and finger and let it revolve as I pull off the film.

Clean and easy and no hassle.

<p>

3: Photoflo or similar, and follow the other gentleman's suggestions

regarding sponges, etc.

I believe there are parts sources listed at www.graflex.org. If your

septums are bent a little, I used a flat feeler gauge stock about the

same thickness as film, and did some gentle un-bending and hammering

flat. The feeler gauge placed under the lip kept it from getting

crushed.

The dense roll sounds like it was drastically overexposed -- probably

the result of a wrong light meter setting since the other roll sounds

like it is fine. The blurring is halation, where the light has spread

through the film base and fogged. A little halation can cause specular

highlights to take on a sort of glow that makes an interesting effect,

but generally it is avoided if possible by proper exposure and

development.

It should but please be careful with that stuff. It is EXTREMELY

flammable, sometimes almost explosively so. The older stick-um used to

have a shellac base that alcohol would cut.

Some shutters are made that way. Does it look like a "factory" bend --

nice and sharp, or does it appear to have come from a jam -- other

wrinkled areas, etc?

Most places I have read that the polarizer is a constant 2x factor

regardless of the amount of "dimming." You might want to check Tiffen

for the official word.