Bad camera, should I return it?

[optique]

Ian, I suspected you started with more capable gear as your reason for stating that. Graflex is really your point and shoot camera!

Monophoto, that issue of foreground focus and depth of field is something I struggle with, on roll firm cameras, nice to hear about forward tilt. I have AA's "The Camera" so I will read up on it.

Tom2468, I thought $300 was too much for this camera, too. Trust me, I looked for alternatives to Graflex. If forced to use ebay, I use buy it now, but there is really not much of ebay to begin with. I vastly prefer to use KEH, BHphoto and others over ebay, but again, no real selection. You would think LF gear is in short supply.

Now that I have been in the field with the camera, I have a question: Is the GG known to be especially dim on the Crown? Aperture was wide open.

I will develop my first images in trays, but I was thinking about using black 2in sch 40 pvc to make some tubes. Any comments on tubes?

Thanks for all your help.
Steve.

[k_jupiter]

1.) A Crown or Speed is a fine camera to learn on. Not so overwhelming you get totally lost, not so simple you get bored, not a POS so you don't get frustrated. I learned to shoot on an old orbital, but my first LF was (is) a Pacemaker Speed. I still use it. I have a 150 fujinon 6.3 lens on it, the GG is bright because it still has the Fresnel lens attached, it's a dark box. Light enough to take anywhere with a backpack, you don't need 40 lbs of tripod, and yes, they are cheap. not as cheap as they use to be, but still.

2.) Instead of mucking about with PVC pipe (as I spent many a hour doing) get yourself a Patterson System 4 tank, about 8 1/2 inch high one. Then get some nylon window screen, cut into 5 1/2 inch squares. Sew two edges together with about a 1/2 inch seam to make a tube. You should have 4 tubes that will take 4x5 film and cause the film, emulsion inwards into tubes. Place the center tube of the Patterson in the tank, place the four tubes on end around the center tube, put the top on, and process in daylight like it was roll film. You will be amazed at how easy this is.

Welcome.

tim in san jose

[Ian Grant]

Ian, I suspected you started with more capable gear as your reason for stating that. Graflex is really your point and shoot camera!

Now that I have been in the field with the camera, I have a question: Is the GG known to be especially dim on the Crown? Aperture was wide open.

Yes, in an earlier post I said I started with a View camera, I have a De Vere whole plate/half plate/5x4 monorail which is too heavy for landscape work, but has great movements, I haven't used it for over 20 years. Movements are very important with LF work and there are some images I just couldn't shoot with a Graphic.

The screens on Graphics are very dim, I measured mine against my Wista and found a 4 stop difference. My new screen is lost in the post somewhere or I'd post details of the improvement.

Ian

[optique]

Ian,

Thanks for the info on the dim Graphic screen.

I perused your gallery, and I like your train related photos! Great work. I wish I could see the actual prints.

That first photo on your site, Pynant, did that require a lot of darkroom work?

Thanks and have a good day.
Steve.

[Ian Grant]

Ian,
That first photo on your site, Pynant, did that require a lot of darkroom work?
Steve.

Thanks Steve, no it was easy to print, most of my negs are, from memory just a little dodging on the left. I haven't actually made an Exhibition print of it yet, but it's reproduced in Steve Anchell's new Edition of The Darkroom Cookbook.

Ian

[optique]

Tim,

I like your idea a lot and will try tonight. Thanks.

Also this made me do some research. Seems some people are just putting s sheet or two of film into a tank so they push against the sides, and then process as normal, but I will bet the anti-halation layer will be a an issue.

I will report back.

[k_jupiter]

Tim,

I like your idea a lot and will try tonight. Thanks.

Also this made me do some research. Seems some people are just putting s sheet or two of film into a tank so they push against the sides, and then process as normal, but I will bet the anti-halation layer will be a an issue.

I will report back.

Yes. the AH layer might be a factor. Two sheets in a tank can also overlap while agitating. For my 5x7 and 8x10 negatives I use daylight paper development tubes on an electric roller. There are ridges in the tank that allow for fluids behind the film.

I also used PVC tubes in this same Patterson setup and you have to give it a short fixer bath after removing the film from the PVC tubes to get the AH layer off. I then would wash in a dip tank by loading the wet film onto 4x5 Stainless holders.

Try the window screen, you might never use anything else.

tim in san jose

[optique]

Yes. the AH layer might be a factor. Two sheets in a tank can also overlap while agitating. For my 5x7 and 8x10 negatives I use daylight paper development tubes on an electric roller. There are ridges in the tank that allow for fluids behind the film.

I also used PVC tubes in this same Patterson setup and you have to give it a short fixer bath after removing the film from the PVC tubes to get the AH layer off. I then would wash in a dip tank by loading the wet film onto 4x5 Stainless holders.

Try the window screen, you might never use anything else.

tim in san jose

should I use the development times for roll film or sheet film, for the screen method?

[k_jupiter]

should I use the development times for roll film or sheet film, for the screen method?

Developers I use (Wd2d+ and Pyrocat-HD) don't differentiate. If they did, I would start with the sheet film and adjust from there. It's all just recommendations anyway. Do an evaluation on what you see in the developed negative highlights. The shadows are a function of exposure time and won't be affected by a minute or two of different processing time.


tim