That's a waste of time.
Get the camera sorted out at a repair shop.
It's not.
Loose film will not affect the spring load of the pressure plate. It may affect things like frame spacing.
And fog will not show up as lack of sharpness.
It's bogus, as AI dribble often is.
+1. I can't believe close focus and infinity are good and everything in-between is out of focus. I'm really scratching my head on this one cuz it just doesn't add up.Then everything in-between will be OK, too. Assuming that you can definitively state at this junction that infinity and close focus really are OK. Only you are in a position to verify this.
+1. I can't believe close focus and infinity are good and everything in-between is out of focus. I'm really scratching my head on this one cuz it just doesn't add up.
I developed the roll i shot yesterday on a tripod focussing on a birthday card on my fridge with flash on f22 ss 125. and with cable release.
Then i put my macro lens on 1:1 and scanned 12 frames and stitched them together in lightroom.
I believe its in focus..?
you mean the negative when its scanned in lightroom without converting?Would you show a backlit image of a some negatives?
Impossible to tell. You shot at f/22. Tests like these should be done at the maximum aperture (f/3.5 in your case I think). Otherwise it's too easy to overlook focus issues due to the larger depth of field.I believe its in focus..?
Impossible to tell. You shot at f/22. Tests like these should be done at the maximum aperture (f/3.5 in your case I think). Otherwise it's too easy to overlook focus issues due to the larger depth of field.
you mean the negative when its scanned in lightroom without converting?
you mean the negative when its scanned in lightroom without converting?
Put it on a
place it on a computer screen (with a blank white page on it) and take an iphone foto.
a stitched photo isn't a good example.
here it is..
As you can see you have a bit of front focus.
can i fix it myself? cold shoe off turn the big screw i think it is?
You'll first have to determine whether the focus on the film plane agrees with the rangefinder or not. If not, then you could indeed try to adjust the rangefinder.
Parallax Correction Problem?
No, that is a framing issue. Not a focus issue.
If the film plane image and the rangefinder setting agree perfectly, then the only explanation is human error: i.e. you thought you focused on the cards on the fridge, but in reality you focused a little in front of that. You misread the rangefinder. Assuming that the film plane image and the rangefinder really do match, that is. And I am beginning to have some doubts whether you're in a position to accurately verify this, so my suggestion would be to take the camera to a repair shop and let them inspect it.
mm seems like no other choice..
I do think i focused right .. about the film plane check.. its hard to see but i did see it was sharp enough.. on the back
Just to establish a baseline, here's a very quick 100% crop from a 1000ppi scan of a GW690 neg ('well used' would describe the 690 in question). If the forum software doesn't do anything too weird to the file, it should show what a decent scan (old high end CCD, but competent camera scans should get more than close) without any added sharpening should look like in terms of granularity, sharpness representation etc.
Film was Kentmere 400 pushed a bit in Ilfosol 3.
Winding problems/ dropping frames in a 690 are usually an indicator that it desperately needs a service. They were often used pretty hard.
It linked light leaks to focus problems. How would that work? The only logical mediating variable would be fog.
I admit - and for the record, I have nothing against Holgaoinists (?) I just don't have that experience. Even so, I don't see how in the camera OP uses, loosely rolled film or a light leak would result in apparent focus issues, especially because no other problems are reported. It's just a very odd line of reasoning and in that sense it's just consistent with what AI does: collect data based on statistical likelihood of co-occurrence. I contend that this is only marginal helpful in solving problems and generally far inferior to old-fashioned reasoning and elimination.
I think my reasoning is that a loosely rolled film acts like a spring and can push against the pressure plate especially if there is enough time between shots for the film to relax.
In principle I have no 'problem' with that; I just (1) see not evidence for it here and (2) to me, a fogged image doesn't look less sharp. It'll look less contrasty and I can see how people might mistake that for less sharp. I just think it's a sloppy wording and therefore somewhat misleading.As for your 'fog' and focus issue the Ai suggested that a light leak may cause an otherwise sharply focused image to 'appear' less sharp and I don't understand your problem with that.
Yeah, that's my main qualm, I guess. I don't deny the potential usefulness of AI - I just keep getting the feeling that proper use of AI still relies on understanding a lot about what we're asking of it. And that sort of defies the purpose - we can only use it well if we already understand, but then we don't really need to use it in the first place. Of course, that's a little facetious of me, but even if you're more optimistic, it leaves the problem of using AI without sufficient domain knowledge bringing the risk of not being aware of the ways it may lead one astray.the Ai he invoked offered misleading suggestions for the problem at hand in this thread
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?