Author Topic: I just picked up... (Read 842537 times)

MiguelCampano · « **Reply #3600 on:** October 01, 2018, 11:06:02 PM »

After growing up in Venezuela, where you had to deal with severe safety issues in terms of electrical equipment, I am not as concerned with that as I am with the little rust spots on the plate, which cause the print to stick a bit to it. I cleaned it up with Bar Keeper's Friend, powder, scrubbing gently with a regular sponge and then polished the plate with some regular silverware polish.

Seems to work fine that way. The test print I used (Ilford FB Classic Glossy) got a nice "glaze" to it, although definitely not "perfectly" flat.

Francois · « **Reply #3601 on:** October 02, 2018, 03:06:20 PM »

So far, the only way to get perfectly flat FB prints that I have read about is to stick them emulsion side down on a piece of super clean window glass. It takes a long time to dry but when the gelatin is dry enough to loose it's grip on the glass it is said to be ready.
The other way is to use a blotter book to dry the prints. But that gives you a very flat finish.

MiguelCampano · « **Reply #3602 on:** October 02, 2018, 04:39:56 PM »

So, for the polishing of the plate... I read that Renaissance wax works well. I tried a damp print yesterday, and a relatively wet one. The wet one (glossy, emulsion side down) got stuck and ripped. The damp one got a bit stuck, like a sticker, without ripping.

Is there any sort of treatment that I need to do to the actual metal plate other than cleaning and buffing it with a cloth?

EarlJam · « **Reply #3603 on:** October 02, 2018, 05:13:58 PM »

I've heard that a bit of Photo-flo in the final print wash will also help to minimize adhesion to the ferrotype tin.

MiguelCampano · « **Reply #3604 on:** October 02, 2018, 05:29:36 PM »

Interesting. I will definitely try that, maybe even tonight. I had to buy fixer, and my local store only had the regular Kodak powder fixer that apparently also has hardener. I wonder if that could also help the print.

Francois · « **Reply #3605 on:** October 02, 2018, 08:07:00 PM »

A hardener is rarely a bad thing except when toning...
Hardeners are usually more useful in protecting the negatives from damage during the washing and drying process.

MiguelCampano · « **Reply #3606 on:** October 02, 2018, 08:45:25 PM »

Interesting. I'm definitely going to experiment a bit more, and buy the wax to polish it so there are fewer chances of sticking. Also, use the PhotoFlo on the washing print and see if that helps.

SLVR · « **Reply #3607 on:** October 04, 2018, 08:58:46 PM »

I was gifted a 4x5 with a couple lenses. Kind of excited to give LF a try. Not sure how I'll print them though.

Thinking of either contact printing or just getting some direct positive paper.

Francois · « **Reply #3608 on:** October 04, 2018, 09:43:22 PM »

You'll see, 4x5 can be a lot of fun.
You can even start using just regular cheap RC paper and contact print from those. The advantage of doing so is that you can do some permanent dodging using a soft pencil on the back side of the print. It also just develops in trays under regular safelight using Dektol or anything like that.

For some inspiration, I was just watching this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSkOjzINQAA

SLVR · « **Reply #3609 on:** October 04, 2018, 10:01:40 PM »

I'll be lending my scanner away for a few months so I'll need a fully analog solution! They have direct positive at downtown camera here. I think I'll swing by tonight and pick up a pack of 25. It looks like it can be kind of shot like film? Looks like it has no sensitivity to red so according to what that guy says would that throw exposure out the window? I don't think I had any problems exposing kodalith when I was shooting that and it has little to no red sensitivity.

EarlJam · « **Reply #3610 on:** October 05, 2018, 03:18:42 AM »

I've been hanging on to the link to Harman direct positive paper for a couple of years now, for a future pinhole project. I'm interested to see your results.

https://www.ilfordphoto.com/harman-direct-positive-paper-sheets

Francois · « **Reply #3611 on:** October 05, 2018, 02:24:20 PM »

Quote from: SLVR on October 04, 2018, 10:01:40 PM

I'll be lending my scanner away for a few months so I'll need a fully analog solution! They have direct positive at downtown camera here. I think I'll swing by tonight and pick up a pack of 25. It looks like it can be kind of shot like film? Looks like it has no sensitivity to red so according to what that guy says would that throw exposure out the window? I don't think I had any problems exposing kodalith when I was shooting that and it has little to no red sensitivity.

The thing with direct positive paper is that while it's not red sensitive, it can't be handled under regular safelight .
The red sensitivity not being there, it won't really affect how you expose it in general.
When I was watching Borut, I did notice a few things he got wrong. Multigrade paper isn't more sensitive to uv rays than any other film. But it does have two emulsions that have different sensitivity. Anything blue will have a softer gradation and anything green will be higher contrast. Reds will be barely exposed.
His process is very geared towards scanning. If he did use a regular paper negative process, he might find that a higher contrast is not such a bad thing.
Also, yes paper has an iso rating. When I try things with photo paper, I rate it at 3 and have no problem.

To use paper and get positive prints, you just need to use the cheapest paper as a negative. That's simply because it's the thinnest stuff available. In the lab, you just sandwich the negative and some paper, emulsion to emulsion, under a piece of glass and expose through the sandwich. That simple.

And if you want to do some dodging, just use a soft pencil and darken the back of the negative. You can even out the exposure like that.

SLVR · « **Reply #3612 on:** October 05, 2018, 03:11:02 PM »

That's strange. I've read it can be handled under safelight. It added a lot of appeal because it then would mean I could load and develop by inspection

I was really hoping that he would do a fully analogue process with his paper negatives. As soon as he mentioned scanning I stopped watching.

Also for all I have been shooting and make various appearance on rff. Been very busy the last year planning my wedding and working. I'm behind on my prints but I might get a chance to get into the dark room this weekend which I'm excited for. My last print session was fantastic and I made some Wonderful prints from my honeymoon.

Once I get caught up I'll likely end up going down the large format dark hole.

I just wish that I had a bigger enlarger so I could print those mammoth negatives. Which is why I'll probably just go ahead with the positive paper to start

Francois · « **Reply #3613 on:** October 05, 2018, 09:36:20 PM »

Congrats on the wedding

I hope the whole event wasn't a bit of a nightmare like for some people in my family

But back to the paper... Direct positive paper can be handled under a safelight, just not any safelight.
If you look at the table I put here, you'll understand what I mean
http://www.filmwasters.com/forum/index.php?topic=9563.0

That's part of the reason why I built my own using an LED I ordered from China. But if you get a graphic arts bulb, it should be OK.
Also, I tried using some rubylith to make a safelight for the Arista Ortho Litho I have and it didn't work. Might work for Harman Direct Positive...

zapsnaps · « **Reply #3614 on:** October 10, 2018, 05:03:18 PM »

... nothing at all. But I have ordered two new ~~toys~~ - essential pieces of kit. I've wanted (another) half frame for a while and I've bought - but not yet received - an early edition of the Agat 18, with the red lens surround, rather than the later & more usual yellow one.

I've also treated myself to a MF RF - the Mamiya-6 version KII from the mid-1950s. It's in perfect condition (apparently) and I really like folders. I used to have an Ensign 6x9, but I swapped it as I started to see square pictures. The 6 has 3 interesting features - it's a rangefinder; it focus by shifting the film plane backwards and forwards, rather than the lens; it has an internal mask and corresponding VF mask allowing a vertical 645 format (in addition to 6x6), which I expect to find interesting, but unused, as I prefer square pictures at the moment. The 6 will fit in a (large) pocket and I hope to be able to sling it in my travel bag and ramp-up some business miles with it, something that the Blad has never managed to do in 8 years of ownership.

Francois · « **Reply #3615 on:** October 10, 2018, 09:30:24 PM »

And the Mamiya's back focus system is also quite cool...

zapsnaps · « **Reply #3616 on:** October 11, 2018, 02:49:48 PM »

It is! & quite analogue. I rather like different mechanical takes on established thinking. "Mountain too small in your new wide-angle lens?! Don't walk to the mountain - bring the mountain closer to you..."

Francois · « **Reply #3617 on:** October 11, 2018, 08:40:53 PM »

Somehow, I find it a bit sad that no other manufacturers went this route (apart from one model of Contax SLR's)...

Kai-san · « **Reply #3618 on:** October 11, 2018, 09:13:03 PM »

I have seen a camera from the fifties or thereabouts that focused by moving the film plane. I think it was a compact fixed lens camera, most likely zone focus. But I have completely forgotten who made it or what model name it had. Scatterbrain......

zapsnaps · « **Reply #3619 on:** October 12, 2018, 11:26:48 PM »

Yes - I think it was the Contax AX which moved the film plane in 'recent' cameras - but one thing is for sure - the readers on here are bound to know of others.

I don't own a Contax - I'd love a T2 but they are serious money these days - I hate internet inflation.

MiguelCampano · « **Reply #3620 on:** October 16, 2018, 02:17:28 PM »

So, I was offered a Fuji GW690iii for an absurdly low price, however, there's a catch:

The camera was dropped while attached to a tripod at a party. The lens/finder are perfectly fine, with the exception of the aperture diaphragm, which would not go to F:3.5, so, basically works from F:4 and up to F:32. Other than that, the shutter is fine, the rangefinder is calibrated, etc. There is a small crack near the hot-shoe, but it is a cosmetic thing that doesn't really bother me. No light leaks, etc.

Now, I know that repairing aperture blades are tricky, but based on the information of how it got damaged, would it be something that could potentially be repaired?

Pete_R · « **Reply #3621 on:** October 16, 2018, 02:55:47 PM »

Quote from: MiguelCampano on October 16, 2018, 02:17:28 PM

Now, I know that repairing aperture blades are tricky, but based on the information of how it got damaged, would it be something that could potentially be repaired?

How long is a piece of string? Does that help?

Or you could start with the service manual at http://www.galerie-photo.com/manuels/fuji-gw-gsw-690iii-service-manual-en.pdf. Looks like the shutter assembly comes out easily from the front of the lens so might be possible.

MiguelCampano · « **Reply #3622 on:** October 16, 2018, 03:26:27 PM »

Thanks!

I think I will pass on it, as the lens barrel seems a bit misaligned as well. "Lo barato sale caro", (buy cheap, buy twice) as they say in Venezuela.

Pete_R · « **Reply #3623 on:** October 16, 2018, 04:15:50 PM »

I think you might be making the correct choice.

MiguelCampano · « **Reply #3624 on:** October 17, 2018, 08:44:43 PM »

So...

Last weekend I went on a walk with Jeff, and after handling his Makina 67, it struck me that what I'd prefer to have is a relatively compact camera that suits me better for my personal style, that being street photography and some landscapes. The Bronica is a great machine, and I am very happy with it but is too bulky and difficult to handle outside of "staged" situations. So, I listed it on the Bay. The camera, all the film backs, etc.

And then I came across a camera I had seen a while back, before even buying the Bronica, and after messaging the seller (highly rated, from Japan), he knocked almost $60 off the price and added free shipping to it. And I bought it.

I introduce the newest member of the family:

s-l1600 (4) by Miguel Campano, on Flickr

s-l1600 (5) by Miguel Campano, on Flickr

s-l1600 (6) by Miguel Campano, on Flickr

A Fuji GS645s, with the 60mm F4 (which I believe equals to a 37mm FOV on 135 format). The light meter works flawlessly, and the camera was CLA'd last Spring. He shipped it today, so let's see how long it takes to arrive. He also gave me a 60-day warranty/exchange policy, in which I can try the camera and if I don't like it or there's something wrong with it, I can return it and get my money back.

In the meantime, if anyone feels like buying a Bronica...

cs1 · « **Reply #3625 on:** October 17, 2018, 09:17:58 PM »

As I wrote in the other weekend thread: I think that you've become very proficient with your Bronica. However, I think that you made the right decision when I look at your style. The Bronica is not agile enough to work well when shooting street photographs. A rangefinder is the right tool for you.

MiguelCampano · « **Reply #3626 on:** October 17, 2018, 10:04:30 PM »

Quote from: cs1 on October 17, 2018, 09:17:58 PM

As I wrote in the other weekend thread: I think that you've become very proficient with your Bronica. However, I think that you made the right decision when I look at your style. The Bronica is not agile enough to work well when shooting street photographs. A rangefinder is the right tool for you.

Yeah, the decision was, in part, due to the bulkiness of carrying the camera (with the lens hood attached to minimize the flaring and such), the light meter (especially to shoot slides), plus the bag, etc. Plus it's quite heavy also.

Hopefully, the new Fuji will be in the condition the seller described and after running a couple of rolls, it performs as I hope it does.

EarlJam · « **Reply #3627 on:** October 18, 2018, 12:16:33 AM »

I had a GS645s for many years. I enjoyed using it but never fully bonded with it. Couple of caveats from my experience:

- The lens really sings at f8. f5.6 is passable, f4 is soft.

- The ring around the eyepiece will unscrew itself when you're walking around with the camera strap over your shoulder. If memory serves, replacement rings for the Nikon FM fit the Fuji thread.

- My camera (purchased new) would not properly spool Fuji film. Kodak worked fine, but every roll of Fuji I ever tried would spool up loose, so that by the end of the roll winding was difficult and the last couple of frames would be outside the light protection of the spool. I chalked this up to the backing paper being too slick for the rollers. Just one of those oddities.
Update I checked my archive. The spooling issue appears to have been with Fuji negative. The various rolls of Provia I shot do not appear to have the light leak issue, so must have spooled correctly.

Enjoy!

MiguelCampano · « **Reply #3628 on:** October 18, 2018, 04:00:38 AM »

Quote from: EarlJam on October 18, 2018, 12:16:33 AM

I had a GS645s for many years. I enjoyed using it but never fully bonded with it. Couple of caveats from my experience:

- The lens really sings at f8. f5.6 is passable, f4 is soft.

- The ring around the eyepiece will unscrew itself when you're walking around with the camera strap over your shoulder. If memory serves, replacement rings for the Nikon FM fit the Fuji thread.

- My camera (purchased new) would not properly spool Fuji film. Kodak worked fine, but every roll of Fuji I ever tried would spool up loose, so that by the end of the roll winding was difficult and the last couple of frames would be outside the light protection of the spool. I chalked this up to the backing paper being too slick for the rollers. Just one of those oddities.
Update I checked my archive. The spooling issue appears to have been with Fuji negative. The various rolls of Provia I shot do not appear to have the light leak issue, so must have spooled correctly.

Enjoy!

Thanks for the advice!

And very interesting about the winding issue. I have never shot Fuji (color) negative in 120, but I am glad that the slides are fine. In your experience, how accurate was the light meter?

EarlJam · « **Reply #3629 on:** October 18, 2018, 02:28:11 PM »

Here are a couple on Provia 100, taken at Crater Lake in early July, 1995.

MiguelCampano · « **Reply #3630 on:** October 18, 2018, 02:32:34 PM »

Wonderful! Thanks a lot... Those slides look great. I was 3 years old when those pictures were taken

EarlJam · « **Reply #3631 on:** October 18, 2018, 02:52:32 PM »

One more on Provia under less ideal lighting. One of the more unique features of the Fuji is the location of the meter cell, built into the viewfinder assembly. If you shoot with filters, you have to compensate mentally or by fiddling with the ISO setting.

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #3632 on:** October 18, 2018, 03:32:07 PM »

After a short stint with a Fuji GS645 that didn't work out too well, I went for a GS645S like yours, Miguel. This shot was PanF and I think shows the metering capability without prejudice.
I was happy enough with the camera, but didn't keep it long.

110926_panf_15 by Sandeha Lynch, on Flickr

MiguelCampano · « **Reply #3633 on:** October 18, 2018, 09:29:27 PM »

Amazing. I'm very excited about this.

Thanks!

Jeff Warden · « **Reply #3634 on:** October 19, 2018, 01:20:47 AM »

Quote from: MiguelCampano on October 17, 2018, 08:44:43 PM

So...

Last weekend I went on a walk with Jeff, and after handling his Makina 67, it struck me that what I'd prefer to have is a relatively compact camera that suits me better for my personal style, that being street photography and some landscapes. The Bronica is a great machine, and I am very happy with it but is too bulky and difficult to handle outside of "staged" situations. So, I listed it on the Bay. The camera, all the film backs, etc.

Hold on there brother, don't blame me for your spending problems.

That Fuji is an upgrade for your kind of work IMHO, and I bet you'll like the speed of using it. I'm looking forward to trying it out.

MiguelCampano · « **Reply #3635 on:** October 19, 2018, 04:12:55 PM »

The Makina is a gateway to GAS, so thanks for that.

Bryan · « **Reply #3636 on:** October 19, 2018, 04:25:24 PM »

My Ektachrome arrived! I also got 15 feet of 70mm Panatomic-X that expired in 1972 so I can roll my own 616/116 film.

MiguelCampano · « **Reply #3637 on:** October 19, 2018, 04:51:30 PM »

Niiiiiiiiiice! Congrats!!

Jeff Warden · « **Reply #3638 on:** October 19, 2018, 06:36:44 PM »

Super8!

Indofunk · « **Reply #3639 on:** October 20, 2018, 02:14:02 AM »

Quote from: MiguelCampano on October 18, 2018, 02:32:34 PM

Wonderful! Thanks a lot... Those slides look great. I was 3 years old when those pictures were taken

God dammit, I was in grad school about to move to NYC when those pictures were taken

Bryan · « **Reply #3640 on:** October 27, 2018, 09:54:31 PM »

I just jumped down another rabbit hole called photomicroscopy. I finally got all the parts together thanks to some help from the nice microscopists over at the MicrobHunter forum. This is a Leitz SM Medical Microscope made in 1958, the first year of production for this model. It includes a Swing out Abbe condenser, coaxial mechanical stage and four objectives - 3.5/0.10, 10/0.25, 45/0.65 and an OEL 100/1.30. The OEL 100/1.30 objective allows for oil immersion to get a better image. What you do is place a drop of a special optical oil on top of the cover slip and immerse the tip of the objective into the oil. The oil has the same refractive indices as the cover slip.

I replaced the regular "S" binocular head with an "FS" Trinocular head which allows me to attach a camera. Attached to the trinocular head is a Leitz MIKAS camera adapter. The MIKAS adapter allows for the attachment of any LTM/M39 camera. In this photo I have a Nikon M-35 microscope camera attached. I can also adapt a digital camera, an M42 camera or just about any camera with the proper adapter. I plan on adapting it to a 4X5 camera later on so I can make contact prints.

I'm no stranger to microscopes, I spent a lot of time in the microscope lab when I was studying Geology and my first job out of college was a microscopit in an asbestos lab. Back then I mostly used a Polarizing Light Microscope to identify minerals. I also used a phase contrast microscope for some of my asbestos work. I can easily hack this microscope to do polarized light with a few polarizing filters.

Feel free to flower fowl me for this.

Francois · « **Reply #3641 on:** October 27, 2018, 10:35:25 PM »

Nerd

AJShepherd · « **Reply #3642 on:** October 27, 2018, 11:44:55 PM »

Wow. I think Bryan wins the "incredibly cool but incredibly geeky" award, and I do hope he posts some shots from this setup as that's absolutely fascinating!

Bryan · « **Reply #3643 on:** October 28, 2018, 12:37:06 AM »

Quote from: Francois on October 27, 2018, 10:35:25 PM

Nerd

All I need to do now is go down to the nerd office and get my official ID. If they give me any trouble I'll drop your name.

Quote from: AJShepherd on October 27, 2018, 11:44:55 PM

Wow. I think Bryan wins the "incredibly cool but incredibly geeky" award, and I do hope he posts some shots from this setup as that's absolutely fascinating!

This will allow for more film wasting in the winter, I just need to get things like exposure figured out. The more I dig into this the more I realize what I knew about microscopes before was just what I needed to know to do my job or get through the mineralogy lab. It's a great learning experience.

Francois · « **Reply #3644 on:** October 28, 2018, 01:23:30 PM »

zapsnaps · « **Reply #3645 on:** November 03, 2018, 04:58:33 PM »

At last - my Mamiya 6 has arrived safely from Japan. Cool camera, good condition, but the finish is quite poor. Sharp edges to the metal. It wobbles when stood upright. Just little things to make you realise that this was sold on price when new, rather than making something of real quality like the later RZs. The shutter sounds a little slow to me, but we'll see. But as a pocket 6x6, it will certainly get some use. Might chuck it in the bag next weekend as I'm away for 3 nights in Shanghai. Would it make a cool street camera?

Francois · « **Reply #3646 on:** November 03, 2018, 09:51:10 PM »

Probably. It's relatively small, it's quiet... why not.

zapsnaps · « **Reply #3647 on:** November 04, 2018, 04:37:45 PM »

It is quiet. Compared to the famous mechanical THWACK of the Blad mirror slap, it's almost silent. For those unfamiliar with the Mami 6, it's a folding RF.

EarlJam · « **Reply #3648 on:** November 04, 2018, 06:12:57 PM »

Quote from: zapsnaps on November 04, 2018, 04:37:45 PM

It is quiet. Compared to the famous mechanical THWACK of the Blad mirror slap, it's almost silent. For those unfamiliar with the Mami 6, it's a folding RF.

Back in the 80s, I was tasked with a super-slide show for a state agency. The agency director claimed to be a "former professional photographer" and insisted that I shoot with a Hasselblad. We had a 500 EL and lenses on hand and that was acceptable. One of the first sequences I had to shoot was for some candid shots at a public health clinic. I made myself as inconspicuous as possible, quietly metered, and composed the first shot. WHAP, CLUNK, WHIR, followed by terror on the faces of the clients at that clinic, so that was it for the day. I went back a week later with my personal Mamiya C3, shot a half-dozen rolls, and used the Blad for copystand work in the studio for the rest of the show. The agency head scrutinized the slides during proof and approval meetings, and never said a word. Long story short, there's nothing like a medium format, leaf-shutter folder or TLR for photography in public settings.

zapsnaps · « **Reply #3649 on:** November 05, 2018, 04:43:51 PM »

I'm too poor to afford the motor drive for the Blad, but that would up the decibels.

I really like the C3 - absolute classic.