Search results

I had a canon demi over 40 years ago. So long ago that I really don't remember the detail of the focussing. But it was only a 28mm lens and for that short a focal length then the figures for in focus using a CoC of 0.03 are: for focussed at 2.0m f2.8 1.65m to 2.54m f4.0 1.54m to 2.87m f5.6 1.4m...

Dan, my experience with LF and the sinar zoom 2 holder I had were not good so my opnion on using them is based on that. Personally I found that focus was nearly always off. However, I suspect that was largely due to my camera which whilst having locking controls on the standards, would actually...

I prefer the R2-D2 myself

correct. Enlargement alignment is very important. Both lens being perpendicular to negative and paper and neg being parallel with each other. But closing down gives a margin of error. However, with AN glass you may see the AN glass grain if you do that. I seem to be the only one who has actually...

+1 all that has happened is that you have lost 1 stop of shadows at the bottom end of the curve. The film will have its normal contrast. If you push it you will increase its contrast and you won't get that 1 stop of shadow detail back. Don't push it. Develop normally unless the subject was low...

if you start changing GG make sure you understand about shimming/adjustment of its depth becasue if you get it wrong and don't know the original depths and thicknesses, you'll never get it back to where its was. You will need to measure the depth of current GG very accurately before you alter...

I think its to do with the minimum circle of confusion in the print which gets bigger as the aperture gets smaller and therefore dof able to produce that is bigger than you think. I worked with smallest possible theoretical CoC at each aperture and magnification. If I used same CoC for both 6X...

pretty narrow window to work within.

6x7 negative neg thickness 0.12mm ( but emulsion thickness is much less than that) 90mm lens with 6X enlargement F5.6 depth of field at neg = 0.0591mm so +or- 0.0295mm F8.0 depth of field at neg = 0.120mm so +or- 0.06 mm F11 depth of field at neg = 0.226mm so +or- 0.113 mm F16 depth of field...

upto what enlargement factor

looks like you already found the one you want

read the "Enlarging Devices / Enlarging" section on second page of attached pdf which has something to say about negative carrier glass and AN glass which is interesting. But if you need film flatness to keep neg within enlarger lens depth of field for the maginification and aperture you are...

I think the the time you leave the print in bleach is factor too. It can be over done. And washing it very thoroughly between bleaching and thio tone. you can only re-try. Shorten bleaching time considerably and use extended wash after bleach and then tone.

Thankyou for clarifying that.

Well yes, I wasn't strictly correct and was refering more to roll film backs where you have to take the GG off and replace with roll film back for each shot which is a real pain IMO. And no you cant focus with a viewfinder so a rangefinder or method for focussing is required. i.e. take GG off...

If you are using rollfilm back then you really need to use a viewfinder. Ther are/were several makes available such as the linhof one which is very expensive but providing you have fitting on top of camera for it you can use. Or as has been suggested a 4x5 camera with ramgefinder. With one of...

what link?