Switch to English Language Passer en langue franšaise Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 74,554   Posts: 1,646,428   Online: 816
      
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 58
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    17
    Yes, thanks for the welcome very much; I have lurked on here for a while and have always enjoyed the brainstorming that goes on in this forum and this is a great example of it. I took photography in high school in the 70s and my first camera was a Canon Ftb that I bought brand new when I was 16 after working summers on a farm picking string beans for $2.20 an hour. I had a darkroom in the basement that my brother and dad helped me build that ended up instead being my solitary haven by telling my parents that they couldn't come in when the safe light was on; so I could basically get stoned in there instead...ah those great teenage years and the fun photos. I then loved super 8 for many years, making movies in college and still do enjoy it. I have 3 girls and for the early years when my oldest was quite young I still used a Nikkormat to document her progress. After my twin girls were born and I was hallucinating from sleep deprivation for 5 years straight, I embraced digital photography as it was easier and the results were quite good for documenting all the chaos that dominated the household. My enthusiasm became muted though, as I saw the millions of photos on computer screens that only live in computer screens; I sadly lamented the wonderful photo albums or personal loving scrapbooks lost, that no one makes anymore. My wife has wonderful black and white photos of her ancestors in wonderful formal clothes for the special occasion of a portrait and how come these look so much better than anything achieved with all the latest technology? As my kids have gotten older (one 16 and two 10years), we began to discover and enjoy together Buster Keaton films and an old stereo photo viewer that I have with wonderful old stereo prints. I realized that I was starting to form their aesthetic appreciation, as they were not as impressed as they used to be with a CGI hollywood movie and would enjoy more watching the original version of "20,000 leagues under the sea" instead. I began to really turn into an obsessed Luddite and jettisoned most of my super 8 cameras and now only use wind up mechanical regular 8 and 16 mm cameras. These cameras are engineering marvels that are built to last and are a joy to operate (even if my good results are only about 50%). I now see myself taking a parallel path with still cameras, as I have sold the Mamiya 7II and the Pentax 645nII that I was so in love with and now only want machines of castings, machinery and wood. Last year I got a Graflex National and just love screwing around with this thing; and when one shot by chance happens to come out great it is so meaningful. I have this one photo of my eldest daughter who is Gluten intolerant standing in a wheat field scowling that is worth more to me than most of the digital photos I have ever taken. I have no idea what I am babbling about and some of the responses to my query have left me amazed just by the sheer technical mastery of these machines that I have yet to comprehend. Perhaps I feel a little bit intimidated now, that I was being hasty in my thoughts about the Graflex RB. I just have been having so much fun with the 3 1/4 with the auto diaphragm. I would like to purchase, as some have suggested an auto 4 x 5; but the last two I watched on ebay went for over 1k and the 3 1/4 I purchased for $200....Even if my problem or puzzle does not get solved, I want to thank all for their help and obvious commitment to these classic methods and machinery; for all these creations I think give us the needed therapy for exiting, for a brief respite anyway, the crazy, technical and sometimes unsympathetic world.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails pic673.jpg   pic672.jpg  

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    554
    Hmm, that's quite ridiculous. I recently sold my Super D to someone over at Large Format Photography for $500 (or was that $450? ).

    Well, you can wait a while and see how I fare. I'll update you when/if I hear back from Bert.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,879
    Quote Originally Posted by jnanian View Post
    hi pablogustav

    see if you can contact the person who posted the photographs of his 3x4 to 4x5 conversion here
    http://photo.net/large-format-photography-forum/00OQrN
    he said it took him 20 mins and it was not difficult

    good luck !
    john
    Putting a 4x5 back on the 3x4 will allow you to use 4x5 film. It will not cover the entire sheet of film though.
    In my opinion it butchers the 3x4, while not functioning properly.

  4. #24
    mhcfires's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    El Cajon, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    576
    I still have three boxes of Efke 3x4 film in the freezer. I have some Ilford 3x4 film from their special order last year also in the fridge. When this stuff is gone I may start cutting x-ray film and using it. The stuff is dirt cheap, works quite well and I have been using it in my 5x7 Kodak 2D. I am tempted to put a graflok back on one of my 3x4 Series-D cameras (Not Super-D), this thread gives me some inspiration. Rawhead, let us know if Bert is still making those adapter plates.

    m
    Michael Cienfuegos


    If you don't want to stand behind our troops, please feel free to stand in front of them.

  5. #25
    jnanian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    17,713
    Blog Entries
    7
    Images
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh View Post
    Putting a 4x5 back on the 3x4 will allow you to use 4x5 film. It will not cover the entire sheet of film though.
    In my opinion it butchers the 3x4, while not functioning properly.
    yeah, i know ... but at least the camera's being used ?
    rather than being a "shelf diva" ...

    it's too bad the OP's lab-guy doesn't just make quick and dirty contact prints ( he is in a photo lab ?)
    and make numericalizations of the prints instead of the films ... it seems the OP's main reason for wanting to "upgrade" his camera
    is to accommodate his lab-guy's not wanting to deal 3x4 film because it doesn't fit in the negative holder correctly.
    heck, he could just put the film in a contact printing frame, leave it out in the sun for a few hours and scan the
    ephemeral sun prints ( or make cyanotypes that last forever ) ... much easier and cheaper than frankenstiening a camera ...
    Last edited by jnanian; 02-12-2013 at 03:02 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    san jose, ca
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,568
    Images
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by jnanian View Post
    yeah, i know ... but at least the camera's being used ?
    rather than being a "shelf diva" ...

    it's too bad the OP's lab-guy doesn't just make quick and dirty contact prints ( he is in a photo lab ?)
    and make numericalizations of the prints instead of the films ... it seems the OP's main reason for wanting to "upgrade" his camera
    is to accommodate his lab-guy's not wanting to deal 3x4 film because it doesn't fit in the negative holder correctly.
    heck, he could just put the film in a contact printing frame, leave it out in the sun for a few hours and scan the
    ephemeral sun prints ( or make cyanotypes that last forever ) ... much easier and cheaper than frankenstiening a camera ...
    So what would a 6x9 Graphics roll film holder for a 3x4 rb be worth? My daughter goes to college next year....
    Where ever you are, there you be.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Washington, the state
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,174
    Images
    17
    My solution:

    Got a Beseler 45 MX II enlarger off of eBay: Cost $17
    Got a 3x4 film holder off of eBay: Cost $30
    Got a Schneider 135mm Componon-S enlarging lens: cost $50

    I just print the 3x4 film myself. Setup cost was less than $100.
    Dave

    "She's always out making pictures, She's always out making scenes.
    She's always out the window, When it comes to making Dreams.

    It's all mixed up, It's all mixed up, It's all mixed up."

    From It's All Mixed Up by The Cars

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    895
    I am working on this conversion right now. 3x4 Super D fitted with a 4x5 Graflok back. I have the back on already, and trimmed down so it's not that much bigger. Need to adjust the focus ground glass and compare with the ground glass back, to make sure they are in agreement. I built a new front standard lensboard and quick-change lensboard system to allow interchangable lenses faster and larger than the original. I rigged a prism on it too, so it will be ideal for handheld shooting. It's much lighter than the 4x5 RB, although to save space and weight, I mounted mine with the back vertical (e.g. no longer rotates). All the conversion so far is 100% reversible, with only a minor modifcation to the rotating baseplate piece, which would not hurt or impede any function if someone wanted to switch it back to 3x4. (not that I feel bad about modifying one of these at all, nor should anyone really - they are not uber rare nor in any sort of real demand.) I believe it will cover about 4x4.25 or 4x4.5", give or take. I'll fit mine initially with a 8" pentac f/2.9 but also plan to try an aero ektar on it, and perhaps other lenses. There's a limited focal length range that will work with this camera, depending on the size of the lens. Probably somewhere around 150mm - 210mm or so. I'll post pics and details once I get it finished. I was inspired by Minnicks work, but didn't want to pay his prices plus I enjoy the DIY aspect of it.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    san jose, ca
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,568
    Images
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by mopar_guy View Post
    My solution:

    Got a Beseler 45 MX II enlarger off of eBay: Cost $17
    Got a 3x4 film holder off of eBay: Cost $30
    Got a Schneider 135mm Componon-S enlarging lens: cost $50

    I just print the 3x4 film myself. Setup cost was less than $100.
    You forgot the Patterson System 4 tank (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=REG&A=details) with the homemade nylon screen rolls to make film tacos out of. 40 bucks.

    tim in san jose
    Where ever you are, there you be.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Washington, the state
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,174
    Images
    17
    To process the film I am currently using an old FR (Fink-Roselieve) Model DT-500 Cut-Film-Pack Developing Tank. It was free in another camera deal. Yes, I know that these things have an evil reputation, but I kind of like the thing.
    Dave

    "She's always out making pictures, She's always out making scenes.
    She's always out the window, When it comes to making Dreams.

    It's all mixed up, It's all mixed up, It's all mixed up."

    From It's All Mixed Up by The Cars

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  Ś   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin