Medium + Large Format Thread Part 2! Because large format takes a long time.

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > The Dorkroom > Medium + Large Format Thread Part 2! Because large format takes a long time.

«‹›134 »

nielsm: Jun 1, 2009

aliencowboy posted:

How feasible is it to unload a partially shot roll of 120 and reload it later? I have a single exposure used on a roll of Velvia 50 that's been keeping me from shooting what I want to.

If I have to, I'll just ditch the roll, but it seems like a waste.

I think you should be able to open the camera in a dark room, remove both spools from the camera and wind it back up on the source one. There might be a risk of losing some film/backing tension i.e. risking the film being less plane on the second run through.
If your alternative is just dumping the roll entirely I'd say go for it.

# ? Feb 9, 2013 21:29

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 28, 2024 20:38

OjaiYoda: Nov 13, 2009

aliencowboy posted:

How feasible is it to unload a partially shot roll of 120 and reload it later? I have a single exposure used on a roll of Velvia 50 that's been keeping me from shooting what I want to.

If I have to, I'll just ditch the roll, but it seems like a waste.

i am sure you can do what the above poster said, but honestly its going to take you .2 seconds longer to burn through 11 frames then it would to waste the roll. i have this problem right now where i am going to need to finish my half roll of 220 in my main camera before school starts, or you (or i) could just shoot with a second medium format camera. if you dont have a second (or third) this would be a good excuse to get one.

# ? Feb 9, 2013 21:55

TheLastManStanding: Jan 14, 2008; Mash Buttons!

nielsm posted:

I think you should be able to open the camera in a dark room, remove both spools from the camera and wind it back up on the source one.

I've done this and it works fine. It will be especially easy since you're only on the first frame. Had you been further along it probably would have been easier to shoot the roll with the lens cap on, then reload the film and shoot it all again with the lens cap still on; basically this would rewind the film.

# ? Feb 9, 2013 22:30

nielsm: Jun 1, 2009

TheLastManStanding posted:

I've done this and it works fine. It will be especially easy since you're only on the first frame. Had you been further along it probably would have been easier to shoot the roll with the lens cap on, then reload the film and shoot it all again with the lens cap still on; basically this would rewind the film.

Isn't it risky to load 120 film from the wrong end? Since only the starting end is fastened to the backing paper, when you run it backwards you risk the film itself not following the paper and jamming. This could be especially bad on cameras that don't have a flat film path, such as Hasselblad backs.

# ? Feb 9, 2013 22:37

dorkasaurus_rex: Jun 10, 2005; gawrsh do you think any women will be there

https://vimeo.com/39578584

http://blog.chasejarvis.com/blog/20...-december-19th/

speaking of large format, look at this dude with "THE WORLD'S BIGGEST CAMERA" shooting loving wet plates that cost $500 a shot. and he uses it to take black and white pix of trees and can barely manage to salvage 1/4th of the pictures he takes. Just a reminder that sometimes (extremely rarely) camera size is not inherently better.

The best part is the video is actually way better than any of the pictures it's about.

# ? Feb 9, 2013 22:59

TheLastManStanding: Jan 14, 2008; Mash Buttons!

nielsm posted:

Isn't it risky to load 120 film from the wrong end? Since only the starting end is fastened to the backing paper, when you run it backwards you risk the film itself not following the paper and jamming. This could be especially bad on cameras that don't have a flat film path, such as Hasselblad backs.

I've only done it once and it was in a folder camera (so the film path was straight and there was no focal shutter to get stuck in), so I guess if that doesn't apply it should just be rewound by hand.

# ? Feb 9, 2013 23:07

rcman50166: Mar 23, 2010; by XyloJW

Camera Shopping Update
As my last post says, I am looking at getting a medium/large format camera. The trade I was trying for has fallen through. I have two people I am communicating with. One has a Mayima RB67 with a 90mm and 127mm lens and the other is a Calumet 45NXII 4x5 with a Caltar II-E 150mm F6.3 lens. Both want $300. If you guys had to jump on one, which would be better assuming both are in perfectly good working order?

# ? Feb 10, 2013 01:25

Spedman: Mar 12, 2010; Kangaroos hate Hasselblads

rcman50166 posted:

Camera Shopping Update
As my last post says, I am looking at getting a medium/large format camera. The trade I was trying for has fallen through. I have two people I am communicating with. One has a Mayima RB67 with a 90mm and 127mm lens and the other is a Calumet 45NXII 4x5 with a Caltar II-E 150mm F6.3 lens. Both want $300. If you guys had to jump on one, which would be better assuming both are in perfectly good working order?

If portability is important, you have to go the RB67, the 4x5 will be impossible to walk around with. Also 4x5 incurs a lot of little bits a pieces to actually do properly, do have any 4x5 film holders? Do you have a sturdy tripod? Do you have anyone nearby that'll process the 4x5 for you? Are you willing to do it? I personally would follow the conventional wisdom and get the medium format first, then jump to large format later if you're still keen.

A couple more plates from yesterday, the shot with the Bessa is a touch overexposed, while the messed up one of my face is caused by a bad developer pour, still kinda neat I think.

# ? Feb 10, 2013 02:11

Ferris Bueller: May 12, 2001; "It is his fault he didn't lock the garage."

If I were in the market for a Mamyia RB67 what would be the best lenses to be after, landscape and some portrait is what I plan on using them for. I hear the KL are the best lenses then the C's after that. Anyone have some goon experience that would help me on my way?

# ? Feb 10, 2013 14:18

Nondo: Jul 5, 2002; CODE ORANGE

Spedman posted:

If portability is important, you have to go the RB67, the 4x5 will be impossible to walk around with. Also 4x5 incurs a lot of little bits a pieces to actually do properly, do have any 4x5 film holders? Do you have a sturdy tripod? Do you have anyone nearby that'll process the 4x5 for you? Are you willing to do it? I personally would follow the conventional wisdom and get the medium format first, then jump to large format later if you're still keen.

A couple more plates from yesterday, the shot with the Bessa is a touch overexposed, while the messed up one of my face is caused by a bad developer pour, still kinda neat I think.

Awesome. You can always tray develop but this is pretty much how I was taught to develop. Avoid retouching areas that the developer missed.

Pretty sure I've posted these. Defects can be fun too... (same person in both photos)

One from last weekend:

# ? Feb 10, 2013 21:44

Spedman: Mar 12, 2010; Kangaroos hate Hasselblads

I remember seeing those shots when you put them up last time, and thy just made me even more excited about doing tintypes. That latest one with the well dressed gentleman is fantastic, all the tones are there. Were you shooting with an Aeroektar or something else with a huge aperture?

As for the pouring method we were taught using the Coffer method where you sit it on your hand, propping up the plate with your fingers. It worked but felt a little awkward. Are you doing them yourself or as part of a group/workshop?

We've gotta get more dorkroomers doing wet plate.

# ? Feb 10, 2013 23:29

Count Thrashula: Jun 1, 2003; Death is nothing compared to vindication.; Buglord

I would loooooove to do wet plates, where do you buy the uh... plates? And chemicals?

# ? Feb 11, 2013 00:05

Nondo: Jul 5, 2002; CODE ORANGE

Spedman posted:

I remember seeing those shots when you put them up last time, and thy just made me even more excited about doing tintypes. That latest one with the well dressed gentleman is fantastic, all the tones are there. Were you shooting with an Aeroektar or something else with a huge aperture?

As for the pouring method we were taught using the Coffer method where you sit it on your hand, propping up the plate with your fingers. It worked but felt a little awkward. Are you doing them yourself or as part of a group/workshop?

We've gotta get more dorkroomers doing wet plate.

Thanks! I was shooting with a Dallmeyer 3B that belongs to my teacher. He does tintypes at a state park here every first Saturday of the month where there are volunteers in period attire. I drive out and assist for practice and take my own photos too. I'm having issues with my plate holder so I didn't even bring my camera last time.

Here's another one from that weekend with the same lens. My teacher composed and took the photo but I poured and developed.

# ? Feb 11, 2013 00:06

Nondo: Jul 5, 2002; CODE ORANGE

QPZIL posted:

I would loooooove to do wet plates, where do you buy the uh... plates? And chemicals?

Bostick & Sullivan has chemistry and plates if you want a one stop shop. Depending on where you live the hardest thing to get could be the grain alcohol, which needs to be at least 95%. Check around town and see if you have a chemistry supply shop before you buy online as you may be able to save some money.
I've been ordering plates through my teacher so save money on shipping. He gets them through a trophy store that just cuts down whole sheets of aluminum to order.
Lund photo has some nice dipping tanks etc but they're not cheap. I've seen some people just make their own, or use trays.

# ? Feb 11, 2013 00:17

Spedman: Mar 12, 2010; Kangaroos hate Hasselblads

Nondo posted:

Thanks! I was shooting with a Dallmeyer 3B that belongs to my teacher. He does tintypes at a state park here every first Saturday of the month where there are volunteers in period attire. I drive out and assist for practice and take my own photos too. I'm having issues with my plate holder so I didn't even bring my camera last time.

Here's another one from that weekend with the same lens. My teacher composed and took the photo but I poured and developed.

So you're shooting an 8x10 with a 4x5 back or just 8x10 plates? I'm guessing from the Dallmeyer lens, which looks to be the more sophisticated cousin of my Dallmeyer 8" f/2.9 lens which I was shooting with.

As for the backs we were using, they we just standard 4x5 holders, where the plate was cut to 92x125mm so that it fits in, while the end tabs kept it pressed flat, worked really well. Have you got a proper wetplate back?

I was thinking on the drive home from the workshop that there would be some societies/groups who'd love to be shot on tintype, and it'd be a perfect opportunity to get better at the process.

# ? Feb 11, 2013 01:18

Nondo: Jul 5, 2002; CODE ORANGE

Spedman posted:

So you're shooting an 8x10 with a 4x5 back or just 8x10 plates? I'm guessing from the Dallmeyer lens, which looks to be the more sophisticated cousin of my Dallmeyer 8" f/2.9 lens which I was shooting with.

As for the backs we were using, they we just standard 4x5 holders, where the plate was cut to 92x125mm so that it fits in, while the end tabs kept it pressed flat, worked really well. Have you got a proper wetplate back?

I was thinking on the drive home from the workshop that there would be some societies/groups who'd love to be shot on tintype, and it'd be a perfect opportunity to get better at the process.

The camera I normally use is 5x7 but that day we were shooting whole plates (6.5 x 8.5 inch) and half plates (4.25 x 5.5 inch) with a reducing back. My plate holder was fabricated from a dry plate holder but it has been giving me problems.

Note the corners on the top dark slide. When it gets damp they bend and the dark slide jams. I've tried modern dark slides and they drag across my plates, leaving areas where the developer wont pool unless I'm tray developing.

[Mod Edit: TABLES]

Somebody fucked around with this message at 03:26 on Feb 11, 2013

# ? Feb 11, 2013 03:23

Krispy Wafer: Jul 26, 2002; I shouted out "Free the exposed 67"
But they stood on my hair and told me I was fat; Grimey Drawer

The Bronica ETRSsi is pretty swell. I cut my teeth on old Yashicas, but after a while you long for a decent lens, real viewfinder, interchangeable backs, or even a grip so your flash isn't sticking out the side.

Hoops by I Like Natty Light, on Flickr

Hoover Dam by I Like Natty Light, on Flickr

I think my camera, lens, grip, 120 back, 220 back, and an extra viewfinder cost just over $300.

8th-samurai posted:

Soviet gear is so hit and miss quality wise it's really hard to recommend it to someone as their only camera. I can recommend Yashicas as a solid middle of the road camera for not much money, my first 120 camera was a Yashica 635.

The 635 has got to be the most pointless camera ever. I was so excited when I bought mine because, hey I can shoot both 35mm and 120. Except it's a TLR so you really can only shoot 35mm in portrait mode - drastically limiting it's functionality.

# ? Feb 11, 2013 04:48

8th-snype: Aug 28, 2005; My office is in the front room of a run-down 12 megapixel sensor but the rent suits me and the landlord doesn't ask many questions.

Dorkroom Short Fiction Champion 2012; Young Orc

Krispy Kareem posted:

The 635 has got to be the most pointless camera ever. I was so excited when I bought mine because, hey I can shoot both 35mm and 120. Except it's a TLR so you really can only shoot 35mm in portrait mode - drastically limiting it's functionality.

I didn't even have the 35mm adapter. It was just a decent little 120 camera.

# ? Feb 11, 2013 04:59

Krispy Wafer: Jul 26, 2002; I shouted out "Free the exposed 67"
But they stood on my hair and told me I was fat; Grimey Drawer

8th-samurai posted:

I didn't even have the 35mm adapter. It was just a decent little 120 camera.

Well except for the adapter it's the same as a Yashica D (which is my go-to 6x6 choice).

Yashicas are awesome in general, but I've only ever owned the 'lesser' lens versions. Has anyone used one with a Yashinon lens and was the quality visibly better?

# ? Feb 11, 2013 05:16

woot fatigue: Apr 18, 2007

Does anyone here know what's involved in adjusting the spacing on a Hasselblad A12 back? The last time I used mine for anything other than a paperweight I remember getting some overlap.

# ? Feb 11, 2013 06:27

alkanphel: Mar 24, 2004

woot fatigue posted:

Does anyone here know what's involved in adjusting the spacing on a Hasselblad A12 back? The last time I used mine for anything other than a paperweight I remember getting some overlap.

Probably adjusting/replacing the various gears in the back.

# ? Feb 11, 2013 13:14

evil_bunnY: Apr 2, 2003

Yeah sounds like gears skipping. PITA to DIY, IMHO. Heh.

# ? Feb 11, 2013 13:51

woot fatigue: Apr 18, 2007

evil_bunnY posted:

Yeah sounds like gears skipping. PITA to DIY, IMHO. Heh.

Well FML. Just another excuse to never get around to selling my kit. I'll probably take it down to Peter's and see what he can do.

# ? Feb 11, 2013 17:32

evil_bunnY: Apr 2, 2003

Never sell your five hunnert.

# ? Feb 11, 2013 17:57

pootiebigwang: Jun 26, 2008

You can also ship it to http://www.david-odess.com/repair.html and he will repair your back for 90 dollars, though I have never had to go through him myself.

Speaking of Hasselblad, focusing is very slow for me. While I love the grid markings on my screen, I hate how dim it is. I find myself stopping down to 2.8 every time I focus just to brighten my screen up. How big of a difference does an acute matte screen make? KEH has one for $99 and I am wondering how worth it it is. This version appears to only have the central cross hair markings which seems kind of iffy, especially after having the helpful grid markings.

# ? Feb 11, 2013 17:59

xzzy: Mar 5, 2009

Hey LF types, a quick question. I need an iris I can butcher for use in DIY lenses, and based on scouring ebay it seems like the shutter from a LF camera would be the easiest option. The Ilex stuff in particular can be had pretty cheaply.. only problem being I'm not 100% sure how to spot a decent one.

Does this sound like a good choice? Is there a better source than ebay for these things?

The shutter is irrelevant for my purposes, I just need to control the aperture. The threaded mounts should make it easier to mount as well.

# ? Feb 11, 2013 18:21

8th-snype: Aug 28, 2005; My office is in the front room of a run-down 12 megapixel sensor but the rent suits me and the landlord doesn't ask many questions.

Dorkroom Short Fiction Champion 2012; Young Orc

pootiebigwang posted:

You can also ship it to http://www.david-odess.com/repair.html and he will repair your back for 90 dollars, though I have never had to go through him myself.

Speaking of Hasselblad, focusing is very slow for me. While I love the grid markings on my screen, I hate how dim it is. I find myself stopping down to 2.8 every time I focus just to brighten my screen up. How big of a difference does an acute matte screen make? KEH has one for $99 and I am wondering how worth it it is. This version appears to only have the central cross hair markings which seems kind of iffy, especially after having the helpful grid markings.

It's supposed to focus at f/2.8 all the time. Did you hit the DOF preview button and then not reset it?

# ? Feb 11, 2013 18:25

Count Thrashula: Jun 1, 2003; Death is nothing compared to vindication.; Buglord

The stock focusing screen sucks butts. I got a bright screen with split prism on KEH and would never ever go back to the original.

# ? Feb 11, 2013 19:01

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

xzzy posted:

Hey LF types, a quick question. I need an iris I can butcher for use in DIY lenses, and based on scouring ebay it seems like the shutter from a LF camera would be the easiest option. The Ilex stuff in particular can be had pretty cheaply.. only problem being I'm not 100% sure how to spot a decent one.

Does this sound like a good choice? Is there a better source than ebay for these things?

The shutter is irrelevant for my purposes, I just need to control the aperture. The threaded mounts should make it easier to mount as well.

What sizes do you need? Old medium format (or even 35mm) folder shutters are probably cheaper and more accessible. I have a few large format shutters in various states of disrepair that I'm not using, but they may be overkill.

# ? Feb 11, 2013 19:13

nielsm: Jun 1, 2009

xzzy posted:

Hey LF types, a quick question. I need an iris I can butcher for use in DIY lenses

You could try cheap enlarger lenses, they always come with an iris aperture and the cheapest aren't worth much anyway, optically.

# ? Feb 11, 2013 19:23

pootiebigwang: Jun 26, 2008

8th-samurai posted:

It's supposed to focus at f/2.8 all the time. Did you hit the DOF preview button and then not reset it?

Wow. Never remembered engaging the dof preview on the lens and didn't even know it existed, but it was definitely engaged. So that should help out a little bit, thanks for the info.

# ? Feb 11, 2013 20:14

xzzy: Mar 5, 2009

My biggest concern is being able to still use the thing after removing the lenses. With the big LF style ones it looks like you can just unscrew the lens and be done with it. The enlargers and other options seem to have their glass permanently mounted. If there was some way to be sure the iris would be usable after modification I really have no reason to prefer one option over another.

As for sizing, I'm inclined towards getting as big as I can get without being absurd about it.. it'll give as much flexibility as possible as I play around with components. Realistically, finding something that is either 58mm or 52mm would be great because modern rings would make mounting a cinch. Would also mean I don't have to damage the device in trying to use it.

# ? Feb 11, 2013 20:31

MrBlandAverage: Jul 2, 2003; GNNAAAARRRR

xzzy posted:

My biggest concern is being able to still use the thing after removing the lenses. With the big LF style ones it looks like you can just unscrew the lens and be done with it. The enlargers and other options seem to have their glass permanently mounted. If there was some way to be sure the iris would be usable after modification I really have no reason to prefer one option over another.

As for sizing, I'm inclined towards getting as big as I can get without being absurd about it.. it'll give as much flexibility as possible as I play around with components. Realistically, finding something that is either 58mm or 52mm would be great because modern rings would make mounting a cinch. Would also mean I don't have to damage the device in trying to use it.

Get something that's budget priced because one or more of the shutter speeds doesn't work properly. Since you'll be locking the shutter open anyway (?) it won't matter.

# ? Feb 11, 2013 23:47

Genderfluid: Jun 18, 2009; my mom is a slut

Developed my 8 sheets of 8x10 xray film. It's really awesome, I can't see myself spending money on normal black and white film for 8x10 after this. A bit contrasty, but nothing too crazy. I'll post scans from some of the negatives tomorrow when I get around to firing up the v750. I loving hate Epson scan

# ? Feb 11, 2013 23:55

365 Nog Hogger: Jan 19, 2008; by Shine

Genderfluid posted:

Developed my 8 sheets of 8x10 xray film. It's really awesome, I can't see myself spending money on normal black and white film for 8x10 after this. A bit contrasty, but nothing too crazy. I'll post scans from some of the negatives tomorrow when I get around to firing up the v750. I loving hate Epson scan

Then why not use Vuescan?

Very curious to see your results. Is the film limited to a smaller range of wavelengths than normal b/w film? I vaguely recall some discussion of xray film on LFF as being restricted to green and blue sensitivity according to which film they used.

# ? Feb 12, 2013 00:10

Spedman: Mar 12, 2010; Kangaroos hate Hasselblads

Reichstag posted:

Then why not use Vuescan?

Very curious to see your results. Is the film limited to a smaller range of wavelengths than normal b/w film? I vaguely recall some discussion of xray film on LFF as being restricted to green and blue sensitivity according to which film they used.

I'm pretty sure it very similar to orthochromic film in that you can process in trays under a safe light and pull the negs when you get the density you want. I also remember hearing that the emulation is quite a bit thicker then standard film, and it's also easier to scratch.

# ? Feb 12, 2013 01:12

Genderfluid: Jun 18, 2009; my mom is a slut

Reichstag posted:

Then why not use Vuescan?

Very curious to see your results. Is the film limited to a smaller range of wavelengths than normal b/w film? I vaguely recall some discussion of xray film on LFF as being restricted to green and blue sensitivity according to which film they used.

Can't install software on school computers. It's blue-green sensitive, I used a red backdrop for a still life and it came out black.

# ? Feb 12, 2013 01:25

big scary monsters: Sep 2, 2011; -~Ｓｋｕｌｌｗａｖｅ~-

Oh god I bought a 4x5 camera what have I done.

It's a De Vere Devon. I've been able to find out basically nothing useful about it online except that it was made in Devon and the company apparently makes enlargers now (so if you know anything more please say). But it's a heavy as gently caress monorail. Came with a Schneider Kreuznach 150/4.5 and a Schneider Symmar 300/5.6 / 500/12 convertible, three film holders, standard bellows and bellows bag, a spare recessed lens board (no wide angle lens though), ghetto reflex viewer, three different sized rails and a massive wooden case. All for £250.

Some of the movements are a bit stiff and the Symmar has a little haze and sticks at a couple of slower speeds, but otherwise it's all in great condition. Got some Foma coming in the post, I'm pretty excited to get out and royally screw up my first six exposures.

# ? Feb 12, 2013 01:44

McMadCow: Jan 19, 2005; With our rifles and grenades and some help from God.

big scary monsters posted:

Oh god I bought a 4x5 camera what have I done.

It's a De Vere Devon. I've been able to find out basically nothing useful about it online except that it was made in Devon and the company apparently makes enlargers now (so if you know anything more please say). But it's a heavy as gently caress monorail. Came with a Schneider Kreuznach 150/4.5 and a Schneider Symmar 300/5.6 / 500/12 convertible, three film holders, standard bellows and bellows bag, a spare recessed lens board (no wide angle lens though), ghetto reflex viewer, three different sized rails and a massive wooden case. All for £250.

Some of the movements are a bit stiff and the Symmar has a little haze and sticks at a couple of slower speeds, but otherwise it's all in great condition. Got some Foma coming in the post, I'm pretty excited to get out and royally screw up my first six exposures.

Holy crap, you outbid me on that by �1! You sonofabitch! :argh:

# ? Feb 12, 2013 02:00

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 28, 2024 20:38

big scary monsters: Sep 2, 2011; -~Ｓｋｕｌｌｗａｖｅ~-

Haha, that was you? I thought that was a pretty pro-tier eBay snype. :smug:

Somewhat sad that it'll be taking much, much worse photos now though.

Had to go pick it up from Edinburgh, carrying that huge thing on the trains and through Glasgow was not super fun. Guess I can tell YLLS I lift now.

# ? Feb 12, 2013 02:06

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > The Dorkroom > Medium + Large Format Thread Part 2! Because large format takes a long time.

«‹›134 »