Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,535   Posts: 1,544,079   Online: 1129
      
Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567
Results 61 to 69 of 69
  1. #61
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,278
    Images
    46
    Wow so much hard to follow advice...

    To echo Thomas...

    The whole 'using one film and one developer' thing... I view it like this:

    After a lifetime search you find the right one. Then you realize how good it is to stick to one thing - and so you offer that advice. Not realizing the search was worth the trouble.

  2. #62
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,888
    For some, the search is also part of the fun. I enjoy trying new things. I do photography because I enjoy it. Why would I stop doing something that's one of the things I like about photography?

    Might make better images - but I honestly kind of doubt it, unless ALL one does is shoot a bunch of films and try a bunch of developers. It's certainly possible to get to the point you're using nothing but stuff you really don't know what to expect from in even general terms, but that's an extreme that most of us don't engage in or advocate.

    I think this was much more important in the days of mostly graded papers when VC papers sucked. It was more important to choose a paper/developer combination, then choose a film/developer combination and work out your development times to match the negatives to the paper. That will still produce quicker, easier prints, at least starting straight prints, but the printing has much more leeway now.

  3. #63
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,533
    Images
    1
    see you at the poor huse
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  4. #64

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Plymouth. UK.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,401
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by cliveh View Post
    Have you thought about getting a Paterson contact printing frame for 35mm, which will allow you to print 6 strips of 6 on a sheet of 10 X 8?
    I never liked those 8"x 10" Paterson contact-printing frames. Everything looks too crammed up onto a single sheet of paper.

    The Paterson Pro-Proofer/Copy Board is a much better buy. http://www.patersonphotographic.com/...m-details1.htm

    I much prefer to make contact sheets with 12"x 9.5" papers for 35mm and 120 rollfilms using a sheet of glass from a photo-frame. The negatives are placed in transparent negative storage sleeves first.

    For 35mm-36 exposure films, I cut them into six separate strips of 5 negatives and then a final strip of six negatives.

    Using 12" x 9.5" papers for contact-sheets makes choosing which negatives I want to enlarge much easier IMHO.
    Last edited by Keith Tapscott.; 03-22-2012 at 04:16 AM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: I forgot to include a link.

  5. #65
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,533
    Images
    1
    not everyone enjoys trial and error,because it can be very frustratingsticking to one thing removes quite a bit of trial and error. if you like it. Be my guest.
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  6. #66
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,533
    Images
    1
    i'm not sure, you understood what i meant.
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  7. #67
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,888
    Quote Originally Posted by Keith Tapscott. View Post
    I never liked those 8"x 10" Paterson contact-printing frames. Everything looks too crammed up onto a single sheet of paper.

    The Paterson Pro-Proofer/Copy Board is a much better buy. http://www.patersonphotographic.com/...m-details1.htm

    I much prefer to make contact sheets with 12"x 9.5" papers for 35mm and 120 rollfilms using a sheet of glass from a photo-frame. The negatives are placed in transparent negative storage sleeves first.

    For 35mm-36 exposure films, I cut them into six separate strips of 5 negatives and then a final strip of six negatives.

    Using 12" x 9.5" papers for contact-sheets makes choosing which negatives I want to enlarge much easier IMHO.
    12"x9.5" paper? The only way I'm getting that here would be to cut down 11x14. I've noticed you seem to have choices of paper sizes over there that we don't. (12x16"? I didn't realize it until now but I just checked and I can at least get Foma and Adox in 12x16. Since I use Adox MCC 110 that's good to know - but way too big for a contact sheet. Just a nice size slightly larger than 11x14 but cheaper and easier to handle than 16x20.)

  8. #68
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,278
    Images
    46
    Revisiting "one camera" idea. So the classic advice goes "use one camera and one lens, one film etc. and get to know it."

    Just recently took a break from 4x5 TMY-2 and did some work with 6x9 Panatomic-X in a Tessar Ikonta, found there were pinholes in the bellows. One shot, amazing, in bright sun the pinhole hit the film and drew a weird pattern exactly where the surge of local "old faithful" geyser was spouting. I had to print it for amusement even though the shot was "ruined" in the classic sense. I also used a spindly legs tripod and self-timer wasn't working and didn't have a cable release. So many, many shots were blurred. Usually I would discard such shots as failures and move on. But some were interesting compositions so I printed them anyway.

    I don't want to say I lowered my standards. But I had different outcomes than I would have had if I had stuck to my "one camera".

  9. #69

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Utah Valley
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    275
    I hold my 35mm cameras "wrong". I normally grab the lens from the side instead of "cradling" it *gag*.

    When I shoot vertically, I rotate the camera clockwise instead of counter-clockwise.

    Finally, I use my left eye. And I close my right eye, I never shoot with both eyes open.

    I've been told countless times I don't know how to hold the camera and that I'm compromising the image quality of my photos because of it. Tough shit, I'll hold my camera any way I please, thank you very much.

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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