Search results

You should try that approach in the UK where we can have four seasons in the space of half an hour. Not least at this time of the year.:D

Ok lets have a forum dumbing down policy then :errm:

If he reads the Negative I can almost guarantee he'll believe metering a grey card will give the correct exposure for a 10 stop SBR which is wrong but since it was written by AA it must be right. All I have done is try to explain why it not. Now we'll have the grey is correct gang verses the...

I still don't understand why you are having problems. If you are using box ISO speed and recommended dev temp and time, then you should not be having these problems of thin negs unless you are underexposing (which is same as placing exposure to low on curve). If you expose for a highlight as...

the length of the curve on modern films is very long and with films like hp5 extends to over 14 stops. Over exposing just shifts everything up the curve. You don't lose it, the negative densities are just increased which results in needing longer print times. Not all films have a very long curve...

What do I think of cheap filters? I think they're cheap.

ddx gives a very short toe and usually a small speed increase of 1/3 stop over ISO speed so given that you exposed at EI 25 then I would expect you to get extremely good shadow separation/detail if thats what you want. However, if you are looking to keep highlights under control then DDX...

I think cadmium is banned in the EU which is why quite a few old papers disappeared. If last Polywarmtone was using cadmium then new one would be a different formulation and not an exact replacement. I only used one box of the stuff a long time ago and got very red tones which I didn't like...

all the gear and no idea.:D

well thats all right then:errm:

but were they grains of truth?

I'd hazard a guess that strong Rodinal 1:25 or stronger was used for development or a similar dev prroducing large sharp grain. Could have been tri-x or hp5 but not necessarily. I couldn't say they were fauxtoshopped. They just look like they've been printed down by someone who knows what they...

anyone ever get any commissions to shoot funerals and wakes?

I see said the blind man:wink:

and just noticed this topic is a year old and has been resurrected making my post above somewhat late to the party.

I would consider using Ansco 130 print developer. Its tray life, unlike most print developers is very long so you can pour it back into a bottle and reuse it days later. Also I have read that LPD developer last a long time in working solution. Both have high capacity. A routine of just topping...

and be aware that the rodenstock gizmo calculates dof when you have incoporated tilt and shift so it does far more than a basic distance DoF calculator does which most software doesn't do and the qioptiq software doesn't do either and you WILL want to calculate the DoF within a tilted lens setup...

You focus at farthest point and note position on focussing rail. Then you focus on nearest point and note position on focussing rail. You then set focus on focussing rail at midpoint between the two points on focussing rail. This is most accurate focus you will get between two points contrary to...

people are always having problems with stand development. Sounds like a fairly unpredictable method of development. Could be you just haven't cleaned equipment thoroughly after last use. Could also be a host of other things. No one here is going to be able to tell you exactly what the problem is...

And another thing, light meters don't work on perceptual values. If something in main light is considered black by you then anything in shadow which is darker will likely be blacker which means what you consider black in main light isn't black at all. Its dark grey. But that takes precisely zero...

and they've made trillions of shite photos too.

Also if you are using zone system placement it is sometimes difficult to judge what subject tone should be what print tone. And its no good trying to use zone system if you haven't verified that what you select in subject actually ends up being the print value you expected. This is highly...

when you say commercially processed what exactly do you mean. Do you mean prints or do you mean negs themselves. Commercially produced prints will invariably be scanned, sharpened and then printed so you will be comparing apples to oranges so there is no valid comparison. And as pentauser has...

But I told you in earlier topic that middle of film curve for ISO standard is 8% reflection. So 18% card is a stop and a tad too light. As usual topic got diverted into nonsense about flare and other pointless stuff. You develop to ISO standard as far as I know. That is tailored to 7 1/3 stop...

well since he's using roll film then he can't develop for highlights since he's likely to have subjects of varying SBR. So something has to be compromised. The question is what? The link I provided above is one way of doing it. However, if OP is doing mostly studio work then I would stick with...

To the OP... 18% being middle is a myth (well most of the time but not always). each stop is twice/half as bright as next/previous stop so units of reflected light for each zone starting at zone 0 of 1/2 a unit... 0=1/2 1=1 2=2 3=4 4=8 5=16 6=32 7=64 8=128 9=256 10=512 11=1024 12=2048 now...

Have you done a safelight test and what did you find?

Why consider what any percentage is? Just view subject, engage brain, choose a target print tone, then meter and expose to put it on that tone. Colour reproduction really doesn't come into it except in very rare cases where you want actual colour or tone reproduction to be literal. The vast...

One minute kodak says film is dead. The next minute it isn't. Which way is the wind blowing this week. Must be dead again since they're shutting down production facilities again.

wasn't meant to be funny.