Ash
Selflessly Self-involved
Right there is waaaay too much chatter about the M8! So instead I decided to try out my field camera that I *still* haven't used properly, and I managed my first 4x5 neg....and it was successful!!
Here's the waffling you can glance over:
It's the pet project that I neglected, honestly. But at least I bought a few extra half-plate backs, and built a recessed lensboard and attached a Wray Supar 4,5inch enlarging lens to it! (also have a spare Wray 4,5inch, and a Ross Xpress 8,5inch enlarger lenses - either for this camera, the 10x8, or for when I actually GET an enlarger!!)
Anyways, a while back I bought a box of Kodalith Ortho or something. 100 sheets of 4x5 negs. They sat un-touched since I bought them months ago. I cracked open the box, tried to fiddle around with one of the half-plate backs until I decided "f*ck it. I'll waste these two sheets and work out how to do it in the daylight!"
The afternoon doesn't last too long so I had to work fast.
I set up the Kiev-Contax on the bookshelf,
placed the camera on a tripod that can hardly support it,
set up the composition on the ground glass - trying to compose the shot in the bottom left corner, where the neg would sit.
Right, so it's a major hassle trying to get a 4x5 neg to stay put in a glass-plate holder built for something 1/3 larger! I practice in the daylight, close my eyes and practice a few more times.
The corner of the film that isn't covered by the frame likes to catch on the darkslide/slat. That's inevitable.
So anyways I take the photo, about 5 seconds I think. *remove lens cap, look out the window at the darkness drawing in, replace lens cap*
Here's the important bits:
I use my 2-reel 35mm developing tank as opposed to the paterson orbital, clipping the corner of the neg to the central cylinder, so that the neg is angled in the tank, and a clockwise rotation with the agitation doohicky will allow the whole neg (either side) to be submerged without inconsistency. of course, where the neg is clipped there is a TINY spot undeveloped.
Rodinal, 6+650ml (basically 1:110 because I'm too impatient to try 1:200 or 1:300), about 6 minutes or so. Don't ask why it's 666!
This film is insensitive to red light, so in the future I may use a safelight and print by inspection. Course, first thing's first I need to create a proper neg holder within the half-plate backs!
Attached is me holding the neg up to the light, and also the neg placed on my laptop screen, then inverted. Beware interlacing!
Not bad for first try, eh?
I'll post again below with links to photo's of the camera also.
Here's the waffling you can glance over:
It's the pet project that I neglected, honestly. But at least I bought a few extra half-plate backs, and built a recessed lensboard and attached a Wray Supar 4,5inch enlarging lens to it! (also have a spare Wray 4,5inch, and a Ross Xpress 8,5inch enlarger lenses - either for this camera, the 10x8, or for when I actually GET an enlarger!!)
Anyways, a while back I bought a box of Kodalith Ortho or something. 100 sheets of 4x5 negs. They sat un-touched since I bought them months ago. I cracked open the box, tried to fiddle around with one of the half-plate backs until I decided "f*ck it. I'll waste these two sheets and work out how to do it in the daylight!"
The afternoon doesn't last too long so I had to work fast.
I set up the Kiev-Contax on the bookshelf,
placed the camera on a tripod that can hardly support it,
set up the composition on the ground glass - trying to compose the shot in the bottom left corner, where the neg would sit.
Right, so it's a major hassle trying to get a 4x5 neg to stay put in a glass-plate holder built for something 1/3 larger! I practice in the daylight, close my eyes and practice a few more times.
The corner of the film that isn't covered by the frame likes to catch on the darkslide/slat. That's inevitable.
So anyways I take the photo, about 5 seconds I think. *remove lens cap, look out the window at the darkness drawing in, replace lens cap*
Here's the important bits:
I use my 2-reel 35mm developing tank as opposed to the paterson orbital, clipping the corner of the neg to the central cylinder, so that the neg is angled in the tank, and a clockwise rotation with the agitation doohicky will allow the whole neg (either side) to be submerged without inconsistency. of course, where the neg is clipped there is a TINY spot undeveloped.
Rodinal, 6+650ml (basically 1:110 because I'm too impatient to try 1:200 or 1:300), about 6 minutes or so. Don't ask why it's 666!
This film is insensitive to red light, so in the future I may use a safelight and print by inspection. Course, first thing's first I need to create a proper neg holder within the half-plate backs!
Attached is me holding the neg up to the light, and also the neg placed on my laptop screen, then inverted. Beware interlacing!
Not bad for first try, eh?
I'll post again below with links to photo's of the camera also.
Attachments
Last edited:
Ash
Selflessly Self-involved
Things to add,
-Those photo's are taken on a phone-cam so a lot of quality is lost. The neg is better focused I promise
-Photo taken wide open at f/4,5
-The REAL Contax will arrive tomorrow (but I've been asked to work an 8 hour shift so I won't have any time to play with it!)
-The negative brand is KODALITH ORTHO, TYPE 3 - far as I know this is high contrast manufactured for document kinda stuff
Here's the camera:
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43/second-belated/DSC00033a.jpg
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43/second-belated/DSC00032a.jpg
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43/second-belated/DSC00028a.jpg
These are photo's of the whole camera, i was sent them before i bought it - these aren't actually my photo's
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43/second-belated/DSCF0189.jpg
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43/second-belated/DSCF0188.jpg
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43/second-belated/DSCF0187.jpg
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43/second-belated/DSCF0185.jpg
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43/second-belated/DSCF0183.jpg
-Those photo's are taken on a phone-cam so a lot of quality is lost. The neg is better focused I promise
-Photo taken wide open at f/4,5
-The REAL Contax will arrive tomorrow (but I've been asked to work an 8 hour shift so I won't have any time to play with it!)
-The negative brand is KODALITH ORTHO, TYPE 3 - far as I know this is high contrast manufactured for document kinda stuff
Here's the camera:
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43/second-belated/DSC00033a.jpg
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43/second-belated/DSC00032a.jpg
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43/second-belated/DSC00028a.jpg
These are photo's of the whole camera, i was sent them before i bought it - these aren't actually my photo's
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43/second-belated/DSCF0189.jpg
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43/second-belated/DSCF0188.jpg
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43/second-belated/DSCF0187.jpg
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43/second-belated/DSCF0185.jpg
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43/second-belated/DSCF0183.jpg
markinlondon
Elmar user
Looks good, Ash, but does it have a rangefinder?
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
That camera looks funky! I bet you can play music on it like on an accordeon!
Ash
Selflessly Self-involved
No rangefinder, other than the one I could see on the ground glass
Maybe I should claim its OT, then again, I took a photo of a rangefinder, so it still counts
Maybe I should claim its OT, then again, I took a photo of a rangefinder, so it still counts
markinlondon
Elmar user
Ok, I give up
Ash
Selflessly Self-involved
Right, I'm scanning the neg best I can... I removed the 35mm holder and I'm using the total light-area for the scanner. It's crying. You can see the crop immediately, but it appears that although dark, the neg is quite well exposed (even so thin). There is obvious tone in the image.
I just scanned it at a resolution of 4800, and it's crashing the pc to save it
I just scanned it at a resolution of 4800, and it's crashing the pc to save it
Ash
Selflessly Self-involved
Here's two images. Both are as the scanner-god made them (no auto-levelling, just as the light could manage).
First = resolution of 800
Second = cropped area of lens reflection at 4800, resized 50%.
So I need to practice on focusing and getting the best from the camera/lens/film combo. You can see pinholes in the neg as I STILL haven't found and remedied the cause.
First = resolution of 800
Second = cropped area of lens reflection at 4800, resized 50%.
So I need to practice on focusing and getting the best from the camera/lens/film combo. You can see pinholes in the neg as I STILL haven't found and remedied the cause.
Attachments
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
I preferred the original title.
Ash
Selflessly Self-involved
Heh, so did I but I got in a bit of trouble - it could be considering stirrin it up, trolling etc.
but I got in a bit of trouble - it could be considering stirrin it up, trolling etc.
Fred
Feline Great
Hey, well done on the 4x5 front, it's good when you get to make something and it really works, nice one. With practice (use an old lens as a loupe on the ground glass) and you'll be doing more accurate focussing wide open.
Ash
Selflessly Self-involved
Thanks Tony. The focusing problems are a result of a few different things.
Aside from inexperience using LF, I left my magnifying lenses upstairs; I have two high magnification elements from 2x converters that have worked well in the past.
On top of that I was using natural light from the patio doors, so I had a huge amount of glare on the focusing screen, and no dark cloth to place over it (laziness etc).
The tripod I was using is for lighter film/digital/video cameras so there was a lot of 'play'. This meant no matter how hard I tried, the camera would move, and that's not good with a long-ish exposure.
Also, the shot is wide-open f/4,5 which means the focus could be a little soft.
Aside from inexperience using LF, I left my magnifying lenses upstairs; I have two high magnification elements from 2x converters that have worked well in the past.
On top of that I was using natural light from the patio doors, so I had a huge amount of glare on the focusing screen, and no dark cloth to place over it (laziness etc).
The tripod I was using is for lighter film/digital/video cameras so there was a lot of 'play'. This meant no matter how hard I tried, the camera would move, and that's not good with a long-ish exposure.
Also, the shot is wide-open f/4,5 which means the focus could be a little soft.
EcoLeica
Check out my blog!!!
wow....good looking pics you got there. I think your work has just pushed me to buy a large format camera that my camera guy is selling for $150. Time to start learning to make bellows!
PS what lens was used?
PS what lens was used?
Ash
Selflessly Self-involved
Check the first posts EcoLeica
It's a Wray Supar enlarging lens - 4,5inch. They're dirt cheap! I picked up two for a fiver or something silly like that!
Look for a really good enlarging lens, but you'll want to have a shutter of sorts. I'm using a lens-cap since I've not yet sourced a cheap shutter.
The camera itself cost £25, the extra backs were something like £30, lenses and wood for the lensboard £10, box of 4x5 ortho £35. That was over a couple months
Edit: An identical LF camera was on ebay for £145 buy-it-now with lens/shutter as well
It's a Wray Supar enlarging lens - 4,5inch. They're dirt cheap! I picked up two for a fiver or something silly like that!
Look for a really good enlarging lens, but you'll want to have a shutter of sorts. I'm using a lens-cap since I've not yet sourced a cheap shutter.
The camera itself cost £25, the extra backs were something like £30, lenses and wood for the lensboard £10, box of 4x5 ortho £35. That was over a couple months
Edit: An identical LF camera was on ebay for £145 buy-it-now with lens/shutter as well
Screwy
All the gear no idea
Hmmmm looks good Ash , LF isn't something I've ever really thought about .
Besides photography I do a bit of model engineering and have a collection of model engineering magazines going back to 1899 , I'm pretty sure I remember seeing a build article for a large format camera from the 1900,s , I will try to dig it out .
Paul
Besides photography I do a bit of model engineering and have a collection of model engineering magazines going back to 1899 , I'm pretty sure I remember seeing a build article for a large format camera from the 1900,s , I will try to dig it out .
Paul
Ash
Selflessly Self-involved
Paul, if no-one else is interested in the articles I sure would be!
Screwy
All the gear no idea
Hehe no problem Ash I will try to get up into the attic for a look this week end . Might even dig the article out for building your own 35mm Camera
Ash
Selflessly Self-involved
Sounds great. I'm getting sick of this temp work being so unreliable, and a lack of a darkroom, I might just have to get the hacksaw out
EcoLeica
Check out my blog!!!
we found an old kodak lens/shutter which is the right size for the job. We got the lens board made, and two back plates made (one to attach a roll film back and 4X5 back). He just making the ground glass viewer. All i really have to do is find a damn tripod (its all metal) and make some bellows (apprently not as hard as it seems, but i might pay him to do that). Once its put together it should be a good camera. Just a paint needed. All up it should cost around 60 pounds in your money! Good deal i think
Ash
Selflessly Self-involved
Ecoleica, be careful. To make full use of LF, you need all the movements. Rise, tilt, shift.
Make sure you make a groove to allow the lens board to move up and down, and possibly tilt on a central axis, and at least be able to tilt it to face further up or down (so the front angles in all directions at least 10degrees) - it's not all that difficult to plan
Also with the lens, watch that it definitely has enough coverage, as you'll find vignetting and actual oval/circular images from not covering the whole plane. In the same sense be careful there is enough extension to the camera, depending on the lens you may need more, or less, room to focus. The camera I have has an extra attachment (see pic's) to increase the bellows extension for focusing.
Also have you altered your backs so they're square??? If you have them square then you can rotate from portrait to landscape. Otherwise you're stuck to one or the other.
Make sure you make a groove to allow the lens board to move up and down, and possibly tilt on a central axis, and at least be able to tilt it to face further up or down (so the front angles in all directions at least 10degrees) - it's not all that difficult to plan
Also with the lens, watch that it definitely has enough coverage, as you'll find vignetting and actual oval/circular images from not covering the whole plane. In the same sense be careful there is enough extension to the camera, depending on the lens you may need more, or less, room to focus. The camera I have has an extra attachment (see pic's) to increase the bellows extension for focusing.
Also have you altered your backs so they're square??? If you have them square then you can rotate from portrait to landscape. Otherwise you're stuck to one or the other.