lens cap shutter speed

[abruzzi]

I've deceided to try out 8x10 to see if I can get on with the increased sizes of everything, but at the moment, the only 8x10 lenses I find with shutters are a bit on the pricy side for a test, so I was looking at the various 360mm-450mm process lenses that can frequently be had for under $200.

But since they generally don't have shutters (or if they do, their price is much higher) I would need to do the lens cap thing. Which brings me to the question, for people who do this, how you get the shutter speed down to something you can manually time? Are you using super slow film? (the slowest actual film, not counting litho film, that Freestyle sells in 8x10 is Catlabs 80) Are you using glass plates, litho or xray film? Are you using ƒ128? Are you using an ND filter? Or are you just photographing in dark places?

I say this because I live in a place that is sunny-16 300+ days a year. An outdoor photo (and I shoot almost exclusively outdoors) on ISO 100 film would require ƒ128 for a 1 second exposure (assuming no reciprocity issues at 1sec).

(I'm actually very happy shooting 4x5 and wouldn't be considering 8x10 except that for most things, 4x5 is just a touch too small for nice looking contact prints, and I'm curious to try some of the alt processes that can only be done through contact prints.)

 

[gone]

I moved from your state to Az, sorta like moving from the frying pan into the fire, so I understand the sun situation. It's something I love about this part of the country, but it does present problems, and we're quite a bit hotter here in Tucson than probably any place in NM. I've shot 4x5 (too big, heavy and slow. I'm a 35mm guy all the way it turns out), and agree, it's too little for contact prints, at least for me. ND filters, and/or a Y or R fltr will slow the light down coming into the lens. But, it's 8x10, right? Surely the camera will be on a tripod, so longer exposures that would account for no shutter would help.

You could always expose 100 ISO film at 50, 25, etc and deal w/ that on the film development end. Combining that w/ filters might do it.

 

[ciniframe]

Why not try out paper? I use Ilford MG4 (because it is what I have) for 4x5 and it is very slow, around ISO 4-6 although how much blue there is in the light will affect exposure and contrast. But at least just to set things up and try out working methods it is cheap and can be handled under safelight. Getting a grade 2 RC paper and pre exposing to the first hint of gray can help control excessive contrast. Overall it’s fun and cheap.

 

[abruzzi]

I moved from your state to Az, sorta like moving from the frying pan into the fire, so I understand the sun situation. It's something I love about this part of the country, but it does present problems, and we're quite a bit hotter here in Tucson than probably any place in NM. I've shot 4x5 (too big, heavy and slow. I'm a 35mm guy all the way it turns out), and agree, it's too little for contact prints, at least for me. ND filters, and/or a Y or R fltr will slow the light down coming into the lens. But, it's 8x10, right? Surely the camera will be on a tripod, so longer exposures that would account for no shutter would help.

You could always expose 100 ISO film at 50, 25, etc and deal w/ that on the film development end. Combining that w/ filters might do it.

AZ is a bit hotter, but I'm in the south at 3900ft, so I defintely get the hottest of pretty much any place in NM. I'm glad I don't live in Phoenix though--that place is a bit much for me...

The unfortunate bit is I have a nice collection of ND filters, but they're rectangular with a Cokin holder, so they wouldn't work with a lens cap shutter. Of course I could get a cheap ~4-5 stop filter just for the lens, assuming it has standard threads. I'm mostly wondering if there are things I haven't thought of. Over exposing is a good idea, especially if I want to reduce contrast as well.

 

[abruzzi]

Why not try out paper? I use Ilford MG4 (because it is what I have) for 4x5 and it is very slow, around ISO 4-6 although how much blue there is in the light will affect exposure and contrast. But at least just to set things up and try out working methods it is cheap and can be handled under safelight. Getting a grade 2 RC paper and pre exposing to the first hint of gray can help control excessive contrast. Overall it’s fun and cheap.

Interesting idea. I know some people do paper negatives, but I've never tried. Any idea if they work with alt processes? I'm guessing probably not since most alt processes rely on UV which the paper would likely block. Nonetheless, as you say it might be a good way to test the setup and process before investing more.

I do have time to consider it. The camera isn't here yet, and I don't have much of the supporting material so it will probably be a few months before the first snap.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

The "Galli Shutter" !

With a little experimentation and practice, I imagine one could get quite good with this technique. Note: you wouldn't have to use 8x10 darkslides for your 8x10 camera

As a musician, I'm used to counting subdivided beats (you know, "a-one-a anna-two-a..."). I'm pretty confident that I can just do a simple uncover/cover with one darkslide or lens cap down to 1/4 or even 1/8 second. Sixteenth notes at 60 bpm are 1/4 second.

Taping a gel ND filter to the rear element of the lens inside the camera would do the trick as well. A two-stop ND filter coupled with a bit of Galli-Shutter technique (or 1/4-second lens-cap exposures) and slower film should give you a rather large selection of options.

Overexposure by a couple of stops won't have adverse effects with most modern films; you don't even have to tweak development times, just print through the extra density.

Best,

Doremus

 

[juan]

I shot 100 speed film at 50 in Florida without a shutter. I set a metronome at 120-beats per minute 2-beats per second) and found I could reliably get 1/2 second shutter speeds. I cut a heavy piece of mat board and covered it with felt. I removed the lens cap, pressed the mat board against the lens, pulled the dark slide, removed the mat board for the timed period, replaced the mat board, then the dark slide. Look online for photrio member Jim Galli’s “Galli Shutter” method using two dark slides. I found f/64 to be a friend. You could also look for a Packard shutter online. They are very simple and easy to repair if needed. I’ve found that removing rust on the inside by polishing with steel wool cleans them up nicely. The bulbs sold by Packard work much better than substitutes and are worth the price. A Packard can be front mounted and used with many lenses.

 

[abruzzi]

The "Galli Shutter" !

With a little experimentation and practice, I imagine one could get quite good with this technique. Note: you wouldn't have to use 8x10 darkslides for your 8x10 camera

I love it! However it would take a bit of practice to know you’re getting in the ballpark.

As a musician, I'm used to counting subdivided beats (you know, "a-one-a anna-two-a..."). I'm pretty confident that I can just do a simple uncover/cover with one darkslide or lens cap down to 1/4 or even 1/8 second. Sixteenth notes at 60 bpm are 1/4 second.

I'm a musician too, but tempos in abstract can be tough to gauge. However this brings up a related idea. If, while I’m setting the camera up, I start my phone playing something I know well, with a consistent tempo, I can time the shutter to the music. For example the scherzo from Beethoven’s 9th, a dotted half note (I.e the whole measure in 3/4) is usually played at about 120bpm, so each measure should be a half second. It has the secondary benefit that it will make setup of the camera fun.

EDIT: I should have added that the Beethoven idea is basically the same as what @juan suggested with the metronome, other than the fact that Beethoven is more enjoyable to listen to than a metronome. Small historical point, Beethoven know Maelzel, the inventor of the metronome, and he made fun of him in his 8th symphony. The second movement has a constant pulse behind it that is reminiscent of a metronome.

 

[MattKing]

Taping a gel ND filter to the rear element of the lens inside the camera would do the trick as well.

You probably want to do this after you have set focus!

 

[Doremus Scudder]

I love it! However it would take a bit of practice to know you’re getting in the ballpark.



I'm a musician too, but tempos in abstract can be tough to gauge. However this brings up a related idea. If, while I’m setting the camera up, I start my phone playing something I know well, with a consistent tempo, I can time the shutter to the music. For example the scherzo from Beethoven’s 9th, a dotted half note (I.e the whole measure in 3/4) is usually played at about 120bpm, so each measure should be a half second. It has the secondary benefit that it will make setup of the camera fun.

EDIT: I should have added that the Beethoven idea is basically the same as what @juan suggested with the metronome, other than the fact that Beethoven is more enjoyable to listen to than a metronome. Small historical point, Beethoven know Maelzel, the inventor of the metronome, and he made fun of him in his 8th symphony. The second movement has a constant pulse behind it that is reminiscent of a metronome.

@abruzzi ,

There was an escape film, (maybe "The Great Escape"?) in which the prisoners learned to count seconds in order to time everything related to their breakout.
I standardize on march tempo. A Sousa march just doesn't feel right at anything else but 120bpm, so it's pretty easy to get real close when timing. No recording necessary; just play your favorite march in your head (I'm partial to "The Washington Post"). I've tested myself up to five minutes this way and am never more than 5-6% off. It works the same for short exposures. Heck, shutter speeds can be off 30% and still within specifications. You should be able to do 1/2 and 1/4 second exposures easily (not to mention the longer ones).

If you need a reference, a sweep second hand or even your smart phone timer can get you started with 60bpm; half of that is 120bpm.

Best,

Doremus

 

[abruzzi]

I don't think it was Great Escape, I just re-watched it ~6 months ago, and I don't remember that, but I know exactly what you're talking about but I'm trying to remember the film. Damn, now I'm going to be obsessing trying to remember. Marches aren't really my thing, but when I was young I listened to a lot of Charles Ives and he incorporated a lot of turn of the century marces into his music, so, while I only kind of remember any Sousa, I know Country Band March like the back of my hand. Now, I could do Holst's Mars, thats usually 120bpm and has a very well defined rhythm thats easy to sync to.

 

[reddesert]

Try the Imperial March from Star Wars, pretty easy to get that tune stuck in your head at close to 120 bpm. I have a free metronome app on my phone that does tap-tempo, so it is easy to verify my tempo.

 

[CreationBear]

Given FP4+ and its reciprocity issues, I find Cheyenne's theme from Once Upon a Time in the West works pretty under canopy here in the Southern Wilds. (Put the lens cap back on at the caesura.)

 

[Jim Jones]

I shot 100 speed film at 50 in Florida without a shutter. I set a metronome at 120-beats per minute 2-beats per second) and found I could reliably get 1/2 second shutter speeds. I cut a heavy piece of mat board and covered it with felt. I removed the lens cap, pressed the mat board against the lens, pulled the dark slide, removed the mat board for the timed period, replaced the mat board, then the dark slide. . . .

I suggest holding the felt covered mat board slightly away from the lens before removing the dark slide to prevent movement of the camera. Black velvet might work better than felt. If strong side lighting still causes a problem with light striking the felt or velvet. consider a shallow large can painted flat black on the inside. Hold this close to the lens with the sides of the can making a light trap. Practice counting seconds when you have idle minutes to fill..Even me with no musical talent might be off a second or two per minute when just a boy.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I was shocked how well the lens cap method worked for me the first time I tried it. I was using a 360/f9 Zeiss tessar process lens, and using a deep contrast filter and moderate speed film (FP4) to get the exposure to around 6-8 sec at a more typical f-stop for 8X10, probably f/45 if I recall correctly. It came out completely sharp, though some grass moved a bit, which I didn't mind. You could also use a neutral density filter to achieve a longer exposure. I used a clip-on cap, the kind you press on the sides, which seemed to be the easiest to remove without jarring the camera. Incidentally, my 8x10 setup is quite rigid - nice solid Ries wooden tripod n' all. I have a couple of excellent 360's in shutter, but this particular process lens renders especially lovely out-of-focus characteristics, or bokeh. I could mount it in a Copal 3S shutter if I wanted to spend some extra money.
For me, the count method of time exposures is routine; I rarely carry a watch.