Arista 100

[studiocarter]

Arista EDU 100 plus used in a Voigtlander Bessa, no number, 6x9 folder with two red ruby Windows, does not quite line up. But it is good enough to use.
When the film was removed, it was bunched a little on the side of the numbers which may have accounted for misalignment of numbers in the window.
But the winding crank was pushed in all the way so it was tight and did not let loose and back wind any. That is warned about in the manual. It had to be learned the hard way.
I still get good pictures.
If I keep using this camera I'll master it eventually. It is my pocket camera.
I began shooting on the first of the 4 white squares, adding one each wind. After #4 had been reached, the remaining shots were done on the last square, never on the number. The hole in the backing paper had me worried.
3 rolls will be developed together in D-76 the same 8-10 minuets.
The weather was so sunny this morning one roll was shot almost entirely before church. Afterwards, I had to wait for a clear sky patch to take a shot and ended with one in overcast conditions.
This afternoon is now so dark the 400 speed film could be used. But it is time for a nap.

 

[studiocarter]

Two things happened to make the film off center. One was that the pressure tab on the feed spool on the top or number side, left top, was too far in. I pulled it out more with an exact knife, as there is a hole in it to allow for that. That pushed the roll of film further towards the center of the camera. The other is that the wind up film spool needs to have the cross and not the bar. The bar alone will not be enough to engage the winder at all or not all the time. That didn't happen when I shot the film. But it did happen when I practiced with old backing paper on spools and with old developed film on backing paper. That is when I learned about the cross being necessary on the take up spool.
Numbers did eventually line up correctly in the center of the ruby window. And I got it to happen more than one time. Film backing paper did not get crinkled along one edge any more.
Arista numbers are easily seen in dim light. The backing paper is black and the markings are light gray.
This film has been used before in this camera and no hold bothered any image. I used the numbers in the ruby window when winding it. This time I used the number 4 square just to add a little at the tail of the roll to be sure as it was pretty close to the hole.

 

[mike c]

Hi studiocarter, I also have a Bessa 1 but have not used any Arista film , just Kodak, Fuji and Ilford. The number are straight forward. Which of the two windows do you use, I know one will give a longer or sort piece of film at the start or the end. I like to stretch out the spacing between frams as much as possible. Great camera for vacation time, but it does need a large pocket to stow it away in a coat.

Mike

 

[mnemosyne]

Mike,
Bessa I (different camera than the plain "Bessa" which the OP is writing about): One window is meant for 4.5x6, the other for 6x9. The Bessa I was available as dual format camera switchable between 6x9 and 4.5x6 by means of a mask (often lost now) that was inserted in the film gate and a switch that allowed to mask the viewfinder for the smaller format.

My advice to the OP and anyone shooting 6x9 folders is to pay attention to proper film loading (as the OP has already noticed) and not using low or medium speed film (Foma 100/Arista EDU 100 is a ASA 50/64 film in most developers, BTW) unless you shoot from a tripod. The point is that slow films (unless you use a tripod) will not make use of the potential quality of the large negative. Consider using a ISO400 film instead, which allows you to stop down and use higher shutter speeds, which is crucial for good technical quality, as (1) the lenses found on these folders really need to be stopped down to f16 or f22 for good sharpness and reasonable DOF AND (2) usually are so unstable/shaky to hold and release (shutter) that there is a high chance of camera shake induced blur at anything than the highest shutter speeds (1/250 s and 1/500 s, if you are lucky and your camera sports a compur shutter). Do some tests like I did and you will find that hand held 1/100 s (in reality probably closer to 1/50 s on a old leaf shutter) WILL result in a evident loss of sharpness. The bottom line is that any possible drawback of ISO400 film (larger grain relative to ISO100 class) is usually irrelavant with a negative of that size (unless you go to really BIG enlargement ratios) and more than compensated for by the advatanges of using higher shutter speed and smaller apertures.

 

[studiocarter]

Mike C, Kodak no longer has numbers on the backing paper that line up with the window, Ilford's is ok still I guess, and I have yet to use Fuji.
Mnemosyne, great advice, thanks. 3 of the rolls ARE 400 speed. I shot the 100 using the sunny 16 rule hand held. 3 were shot at f16 because the weather was bright and sunny. Then a G Wratten filter was tried to get darker blue sky patches. 400 on a sunny day was possible and worked on an earlier roll. Pictures are sharp at 1/400 fF22 without filters. I never considered sharpness except with a Pentax 6x7 and mirror slap and long lenses. Now I will add the folders to make a list. I did have blurry pictures with a Ikonta on a dark afternoon and you are right. A solid shot just could not be achieved propping the camera next to a phone pole or setting it on a wall. A tripod was needed along with a cable release. My goal is to print 12x18 or a little larger on 16x20 paper trimmed to some standard size, yet to be figured out.
Thanks again for the heads up.
Michael

 

[mike c]

Well I do use a tripod on some shots, but to me the Idea of this camera back when it was made was more or less a traveling handheld camera with tripod as optional. But you both are right about the higher shutter speed with faster film .

 

[mnemosyne]

Well I do use a tripod on some shots, but to me the Idea of this camera back when it was made was more or less a traveling handheld camera with tripod as optional. But you both are right about the higher shutter speed with faster film .

You are right! But we should not forget that up to the 1950s it was normal to make contact prints on 7.5x10 cm paper from the negatives or very tiny "enlargements" at best. So it really didn't matter very much which shutter speeds you used hand held or which aperture or if the focus was spot on. The size of the negative would really help to get acceptable results. But we tend to use these cameras with different expectations in mind, as nowadays 35mm is already capable of quite remarkable quality. So I think most users expect a substantial boost in quality compared to a (quality) 35mm negative to make bigger enlargements.

 

[studiocarter]

Hi studiocarter!...Which of the two windows do you use, I know one will give a longer or sort piece of film at the start or the end. I like to stretch out the spacing between frams as much as possible. Great camera for vacation time, but it does need a large pocket to stow it away in a coat.

Mike

With the strap at the top, I use the bottom window. The top one is closed. Then the bottom one is taped over between shots.
The camera does fit into my trousers pocket but pulls the pants down. Old timers wore suspenders or "braces" to hold them up.
Spacing starts with the first square, but you run out of them too soon, so, film may be advanced 1/2 square each frame, or just as the square appears in the window, to achieve the maximum space between negatives. There are 4 squares. Half step advances comes out just right. Something like that. The last square could be moved up more in the window each wind further. I'll try that next roll. This roll started with the number just barely visible in the narrow part of the window. That is way easier to keep track of for me.

 

[mike c]

OK, both the red windows can be closed or opened but not individually. So you are holding the camera in portrait (vert.) position,with the strap on top, my top window just has the red window but the bottom red window has an X on the blind when I close them. I have not used Arista film yet so do not know about the 4 squares,just the numbers on Kodak,Ilford and Fuji.And yes I wear suspenders, but my pants pockets are to small , but it do fit in my jacket pockets.

 

[mike c]

You are right! But we should not forget that up to the 1950s it was normal to make contact prints on 7.5x10 cm paper from the negatives or very tiny "enlargements" at best. So it really didn't matter very much which shutter speeds you used hand held or which aperture or if the focus was spot on. The size of the negative would really help to get acceptable results. But we tend to use these cameras with different expectations in mind, as nowadays 35mm is already capable of quite remarkable quality. So I think most users expect a substantial boost in quality compared to a (quality) 35mm negative to make bigger enlargements.

Yes this is true, and they can produce sharp enlargements with tripod and cable release and handheld if careful using higher shutter speeds.

 

[studiocarter]

OK, both the red windows can be closed or opened but not individually. So you are holding the camera in portrait (vert.) position,with the strap on top, my top window just has the red window but the bottom red window has an X on the blind when I close them. I have not used Arista film yet so do not know about the 4 squares, just the numbers on Kodak, Ilford and Fuji. And yes I wear suspenders, but my pants pockets are too small, but it do fit in my jacket pockets.

My camera only will close one or the other window, not both together. The manual seems to say that both windows could be closed at the same time. Not mine. So I use tape between windings. I use the bottom window to make the first shot nearer to the head of the roll. The top window is for shooting 6x4.5 second shot.
Kodak no longer prints the necessary numbers on the film backing paper. Those numbers are the closest to the center in the 8 shot rows. There used to be three rows of numbers for each format.
Michael

 

[mike c]

studiocarter, forgot what mneosyne posted about our cameras are differnt. I must have older Kodak film then ,mine have the correct numbers, although Freestyle still has not gotten a new shipment since the bad backing of the last batch.

 

[studiocarter]

All right. A test was made. Hand held verses tripod held. Same film, time, location, settings. F 16 1/100, then f22 1/100 both hand held. Then the same thing was done on a tripod. The scene was a very long landscape city shot. The light was bright sun from the left in the morning. Slightly hazy. Scans will be one tiny area the same on each negative in as high a dpi as I can do. 4800 I think. No plastic sleeves. The incident light was exactly half way between 160 & 320 with the high slide in on a Sekonic Studio Delux light meter.
Three shots remain.
BTW do not use Gaffer's Tape to cover the ruby window. It pulled it out!

 

[studiocarter]

1/100 f16 hand held on top, tripod held on bottom, 4800 dpi, 6x9 120 Arista 100 film.

 

[MattKing]

What scanner are you using? I ask, because none of the flatbed scanners are capable of resolving anything close to 4800 ppi. Usually the optical maximum is somewhere around 1700 ppi, with the rest being supplied by software interpolation.

 

[studiocarter]

It is a Canon Canoscan 8800F and I just picked the number not knowing how it works.
Here is the full image

 

[mike c]

Studio, they both look pretty fuzzy at that degree of enlargement, cannot see much of a difference.

 

[MattKing]

Anything more than 1200 ppi with that scanner is liable to distort the results of any film or camera evaluation you are trying to accomplish.

 

[studiocarter]

There is no difference between hand held and tripod mount and that is the point. The huge enlargement enables me to see the fine details of far structures that camera shake would obscure, if it occurred.

 

[studiocarter]

6x9. 120 film numbers begin closest to where the film is taped to the backing paper. I began shooting on the first of the 4 white squares before the number 1 and got tape residue in that first shot. 3/8" leader was on that end. 3" almost was on the tail and no hole showed.
Film is irregularly attached so no more squares. Numbers will be used in the window from now on.

 

[studiocarter]

BTW, now that I've followed the thread on twiddling I can see banding in the sky in the photo shown above. This has happened on at least one other film and a lot on this film.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

The only difference I can see between the two is that the tripod version has slightly lighter tones... but that could just be from scanning.

 

[studiocarter]

The only difference I can see between the two is that the tripod version has slightly lighter tones... but that could just be from scanning.

At 1/50 there may be a difference. The lens is 105mm and those photos were shot at 1/100 according to the handheld rule. Even so, I managed to blur a 1/100 shot handheld.

 

[studiocarter]

The Arista 400 film snags at the end. That tape wrap gets fouled so then part could get light struck. I now unload it in the dark. Otherwise it is fine. If there is new roughness after #8 stop winding and use a bag or take it to the darkroom.

Numbers show. I wound with the number showing in the ruby window and no hole got in the last frame. The camera is a Voigtlander Bessa 6x9.