Tony Rowlett

I've got both Kindermann and Nikor tanks, and each of my reels fit both perfectly. I can't distinguish the two types of reels I have, but my favorites are the ones with the little nubs that fit the sproket holes, and the others have the spring loaded clip thing. All fit all.

First image post into a forum since the upgrade. 

Leica Monochrom (EDIT: not M6), 75/1.4 Summilux, wide open with neutral density filter. Got the film bug, so began splashing and shaking Ilford again. 🙂

Stop bath, which is just strong vinegar, or simply a water rinse and then fixer (hypo) which is also acidic.

You happen upon or contrive a scene and you make a photograph. Then you start a rescue operation. Maybe you start by rescuing a fleeting moment from your reactions to a scene. You then rescue a photograph from a mix mash of elements and background that hinder the real essence of it. Rescue it from a machine and a memory card or a backup disc. Rescue it from a bath of chemicals and acids and continuous agitation. Rescue it from a curtain rod. Rescue it from an ink jet printer. Rescue the One from a group of its inferiors. Rescue it from deterioration or grubby hands or loss. The photograph was conceived and has lived in multiple wombs and it is finally born into an object in and of itself. 

I would like one, too, but I’ve recently dusted off my old M6 and have been shooting with it. After so many years of digital. It’s great.

Price is never the best topic, and neither are the questions of why or how people can afford this or that.

 

For me, I love the cameras that I use, not based on price, but based on..... something else I can't put my finger on at the moment.

Eric Kim: http://erickimphotography.com/blog/

 

DigitalRev: http://www.digitalrev.com/

No, DigitalRev is a different dude, but both are interesting. DigitalRev ("review") guy does a lot of camera reviews. Google both of them.

The hospital in swamp shot is very striking to me, too. Can you imagine? Wow.

If you look at the very first posts in that forum, you'll notice that I was basically talking to myself! HAHA!

The problem, of course, is that it shows email addresses in plain state which has been a spam problem.

See this link (w/ example): http://www.photo.net/columns/mjohnston/column49/

The Noctilux is a good one. I'm using one that is a version old from the current model. It is big, heavy, and expensive.

Kind of harsh, Allen. I thought it was mostly acceptable in a discussion environment to do that.

One Microsoft technician giving a talk at an IT conference I attended said about Windows Vista (this when Microsoft was first rolling out Windows 7): "Vista has been our most productive operating system yet; once you turn it on, you can go do something else and get a lot of work done!"

Very cool. Thanks a lot for your work on this. For awhile, maybe during the 1960s(?) they had a series that discussed photographs which I liked. I also remember another series that was sort of a "What's Wrong with This Picture" thing, which I thought was neat.

Here is another review I thought was nice. It includes a .zip file with four .dng files you can download and process yourself.

 

http://lavidaleica.com/content/hands-leica-q-type-116

Ray, I'm not sure, but maybe Edward meant a monochrome printing process that would suit the quality of the Leica images. Colorbyte's "Imageprint" software is extremely good, but its user interface is a bit quirky in my opinion. (I have not seen version 10, though.) http://colorbytesoftware.com/

I have been using one and I really enjoy it.

 

Some notes. Initially, I kept the shutter speed on A and became very frustrated with the shortness of battery life while not knowing why. I have since learned how to shoot the thing and keep it off of the A setting and my battery lasts surprisingly longer.

 

I get a lot of remarks from the non-photographers who notice its old-style yet refined looks. "Wow, nice camera! That's an old film model, right?" Not so surprising, really. I am always tickled when I tell them, no, it's a newish digital camera, but it takes lenses dating back to 1954 without adapters, and even before that with adapters!

 

The files are beautiful. As Lex points out, though, it's easy to over do them with those sliders. I tend to make adjustments fairly modestly now, and after I think I'm done, I up the exposure a tad, and bring the other sliders like shadow and clarity down to earth from outer space.

 

Being a little thicker than the traditional film M camera, a "Thumbs Up" from Match Technical Services ( http://www.matchtechnical.com/Pages/default.aspx ) is an awesome accessory, and it makes the camera feel like a pair of Birkenstocks, i.e. like it is super-glued to my hand. (My Birks sometimes are hard to shake off, they fit so well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birkenstock )

I use a Thumbs-Up http://www.matchtechnical.com/Pages/ThumbsUpEP1.aspx and really like it.

 

EDIT: I also got this fellow's eye piece magnifier, and it's improved upon my focusing at wide apertures.

Nice thread. Always enjoy looking at photography of cameras.

So if Leica doesn't have a "look" does that mean that all manufacturer's lenses, across the board, look the same? Just sayin'...

Not to hijack the thread too much here, but here is a link to that Dessau photo with a snippet of the film which shows the lady (on the right) hitting the informant! Wow! I never knew exactly what was going on in that picture.

 

http://iconicphotos.wordpress.com/2009/04/22/exposing-of-a-gestapo-informer/

The FAA doesn't create statutes, however, and federal agencies are not exempt from having to follow statutes.

Since my wife enjoys reading and watching Martha, I'm going to have to convince her that she needs one of these babies!