HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: clev@cisco.com (Robert Clevenger)
Subject: Re: E-6 in Jobo
Organization: Cisco Systems
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 22:42:34 GMT

In article <3090@ra.nrl.navy.mil> tse@ra.nrl.navy.mil (Anthony Tse) writes:

	   Does anyone know what the correction factor is for doing E-6
   in a Jobo?  I seems to remember 80% of recommanded development time
   is the correct compansation for continious agitation in a Jobo.  The
   Kodak hobby pack didn't give any correction factor and Kodak won't
   tell me over the phone either.

   -Anthony

I asked this very same question about 2 weeks ago.  Here are the
responses I got (names deleted):

------------------------
I've used the times right off the slide rule that comes with the pack,
and the ``equation'' 4 4x5 = 1 36 exposure roll.  (The ``official''
version of the correlation says that an 8x10 is equivalent to a
36-exposure roll, but since 1 8x10 is exactly equal to 4 4x5s....)

-------------------------
Jobo recommends diluting the reversal bath to 60% of it's normal
strength for rotary processing.  I don't know why.  I usually do it
that way, but I've also done with all solutions mixed normally, and
don't really see any difference.  I've never done sensitometric tests
to find out of there is a difference.

Other than that, there's nothing terribly unusual about E-6 and sheets
in a Jobo tank.  Remember that the Jobo processor is basically just
rolling the tube back and forth, too, and it's constant, gentle
agitation.  Works fine.  I think overagitation is very difficult to
achieve; it's underagitation you have to watch for.  The purpose of
agitation is to bring fresh solution to the emulsion, and carry away
the byproducts.  A little more sloshing with fresh solution isn't going
to hurt anything.  On the other hand, if you intentionally reduce
agitation so that the develop will partially exhaust itself, as in many
black and white film developing techniques, you're dealing with an
unpredictable and unrepeatable influence.  Underagitation -- bad, bad.
Overagitation -- good, good.  (To a point.  You don't want to *abuse*
the film, but you'd really have to work at it do that.)

I'm guessing I usually set the Jobo for about 40 RPM or so -- I know
it's noticeably less than one revolution per second.  It changes
direction every two and half revolutions, or thereabouts.

Use the times, temperatures, and etc. in the Hobby Pac book, along with
your techniques from black and white processing.  Keep it rolling at a
modest pace the whole time.  The first developer is the one that counts
-- the others can all be a bit sloppy, and running a little long won't
hurt anything, and might even help.

   __	             _
  |  |'`'`'`'`'`'`'`| |
  |  |Rob Clevenger | |
  |  |              | |/|
  |  |clev@cisco.com| | |
  |  |              | |\|
  |  |415.688.4447  | |
  |  |              | |
  |__|`'`'`'`'`'`'`'|_|
   _|________________|_
  |____________________|
            T
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Price disparities of (circular) polarizers
Date: 31 Jul 92 16:46:48 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <rauch.712521205@groucho.tapir.Caltech.EDU>, rauch@groucho.tapir.Caltech.EDU (Kevin Rauch) writes:
> 
> I've been looking around for a circular polarizer for my Elan, and noticed
> that there's a very large range in prices. For 58mm (what I need), from 
> about $25 for a Hoya at the local Fedco to $80 for a B+W or Canon's own from
> B&H. I can see how multicoating would make some difference (I can't tell if
> the Hoya is coated at all--does anyone know one way or the other?), but a
> factor of >3 in price?? Does anyone know whether the polarizing efficiency 
> (the percent polarization of the transmitted light) varies significantly among
> different brands? I remember seeing polarizing material in the Edmund
> Scientific catalog, with the high efficiency stuff (>99%) being considerably 
> more expensive than the lower grade sheets. It makes me wonder whether the more
> expensive ones might actually be more effective. Any thoughts or experiences?

The polarization efficency (actually extinction ratio) of these filters is
probably not an issue. For photographic purposes I doubt very much that there
would be any observable difference. The bigger issue is wavefront distortion
which affects image quality. Circular polarizers are multilayer structures
(at least 4 layers plus cements etc.) and can significantly degrade image
sharpness. I have tested both "no-name" brands as well as Hoya and Tiffen.
The no-name filter was the worst, with the Hoya and Tiffen quite a bit better
(though still showing significant image degradation). I have never looked at
a B&W, but I doubt they are much better than the medium price filters. By the
way, I don't think there are any multicoated circular polarizers - Hoya 
doesn't list multicoating as on option on this type of filter and I don't
know of anyone else who does.


===============================================================
Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
===============================================================
From: ka1gt@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (robert.m.atkins)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: International Photographer
Date: 22 Jul 92 16:41:47 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <5031@transfer.stratus.com>, davidw@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Dave Wellwood) writes:
> I recently recieved a complimentary issue of "International Photographer."
> It offers membership in International Freelance Photographers Organization  
> (IFPO). Does anyone have any experience and information with this organization  
> and magazine? Is it worth joining?

These guys again! IFPO's main reason to be in business is to sell phoney
press passes and the like to it's "members". They will sell you all kinds
of things - certificates to say you are a "professional model photographer"
or a "professional sports photographer". They will sell you business cards
and stationary that say the same. They will sell you letters of authorisation
to get into "closed" events so you can get in the way of the real pros.
I've no idea if these phoney credentials fool anyone - though they do if you
believe the "articles" in their magazine. I would guess you would do just as
well making up your own "press passes". If you want to be a party to their
programs, and are willing to pay, then they probably deliver what they
promise. Whether what they promise will do you any good is another matter.

I have no connection with IFPO, other than being a regular receiver of their
"complimentary issues of International Photographer" for some unknown reason.

===============================================================
Bob Atkins  AT&T Bell Labs  email (direct)  att!clockwise!rma
===============================================================
r 
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: frank@truevision.com (Frank Loffel)
Subject: Re: Wanted: A light table or slide sorting recommendations
Organization: Truevision Inc., Indianapolis, IN
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 03:25:49 GMT


chris@fnbc.com (Chris Toczycki) writes:

>I will soon be inundated with 2500 slides from a trip and want to sort them  
>down to less than 300 (I know, fat chance).

Just returned from a long trip, too. 66 rolls of Velvia.

>Assuming that a light table is the most practical way to go about this, I'm  
>wondering if anyone has a light table they are willing to sell or can recommend >one.

I can recommend the Idealite. It's cleverly designed with a single 12V
fluorescent tube and provides even illumination. The lit area is large
enough for 5 by 5 mounted slides, not enough for a full 36 exposure roll.
I usually put on half a roll worth at one time. I bought mine at Helix
in Chicago for $50.

There are other products that cost more that flicker or are unevenly lit.

>Oh!  Do I need a loupe?  If so, can you recommend power and make?

Yes. Ideally, you'll want both a 4x and an 8x/10x.  The 4x lets you view the
whole slide without moving the loupe and discover major sharpness problems. 
The 8x/10x lets you judge fine detail and sharpness.

I use the Hoya 4x loupe. At $80, it was the least expensive loupe that I
found to evenly cover the full frame with little distortion. Some cheaper 
loupes have a narrower field and are a pain to use.

I find that I want to watch each of my slides at least once through a projector.i The visual impact of, say, a 3 by 2 meter projection is 
very rewarding. Think about the energy it took to shoot the pictures.

>Thanks!
>Chris Toczycki
>chris@fnbc.com

You're welcome. So, just where did you shoot all those slides?

-- 
-- Frank Loffel, Truevision, Inc., uunet!epicb!frank frank@truevision.com :-) --
From: feldman@hal9k.cxo.dec.com (james feldman)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Mamiya 645 News
Date: 28 Jul 92 20:31:44 GMT
Reply-To: feldman@hal9k.cxo.dec.com (james feldman)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation

In article <5360771@hplsla.hp.com>, andyc@hplsla.hp.com (Andy Cassino) writes:

|>I received some product sheets from Mamiya yesterday. One announced
|>the new 300mm f/2.8 APO-IF lens. They say a succesful fashion photog
|>tried it out on a 645 Super and declared it his dream camera; he "traded
|>most of his other equipment for it". The best price on that lens right 
|>now is over $8500 so that's easy to understand!

B&H price is $5599, (june SB) not so new really, it's been out for about 6
months.

|>Also, there is a new Hove Pro book due out late September by Bob Shell
|>about all Mamiya medium format cameras - including the TLR and Press.
|>No mention of the new Mamiya 645 but they have a teeny little picture 
|>of Bob Shell holding a Super equipped with a very streamlined-looking 
|>prism, but that's all I can see.

Bob Shell is a little better than the average Shutterbug writer, which isn't
saying much.  I find their valid information / noise(mis- or dis-information)
ratio is about 2:1, worse, some issues seem to reverse that.  I'm a pretty big
(no personal comments please!) RB fan, and I don't think I'll be rushing out to
buy the book.

jimf
--
My opinions and ideas are, in fact, not mine at all, but the property of
Digital Equipment Corp. (provided they relate to computers).  Opinions I may
have concerning other subjects are not really mine either, but are the product
of the environment I have been exposed to.  Thus, I am totally without
responsibility for anything I may say or do. 
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: sparks@col.hp.com (John Sparks)
Subject: Re: advice needed on nikon f3
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 15:47:09 GMT
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division
Keywords: nikon f3

In article <1992Jul26.023158.8650@athena.mit.edu> sttay@athena.mit.edu (Stephen T Tay) writes:
>1. i think there are two battery compartments in the base plate of the body. what
>are these compartments for?

One is the battery compartment for the light meter and shutter electronics.
The other one (the one under the rewind knob) is for coupling the motor
drive for rewinding the film (do not remove this cover when there is film
in the camera as it is just a hole in the baseplate for a spindle to go
up into the base of the film canister).

>2. the f3 comes with a de-2 viewfinder. does this viewfinder give 100% coverage?

I belive that all finders on the F3 give 100% coverage, but I'm not sure off
the top of my head.

John Sparks
From: rossi@gvlf9-q.gvl.unisys.com (Pete Rossi)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: FOR SALE: Minolta 28mm lens
Date: 28 Jul 92 13:04:23 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Paramax Systems Corp (A Unisys Company), Great Valley Labs, PA

MC MINOLTA CELTIC  28mm f2.8 lens  with 55mm 1A filter and case

Like new.   Hardly used.  Its been sitting in my closet ever since I
got my 28-85 lens 10 years ago.  I may even have the original box up
in the attic :-)  $75 + U pay shipping

=================================================================
Pete Rossi - WA3NNA                  rossi@gvl.unisys.com

Paramax Systems Corporation - a Unisys Company
Electronic Systems - Valley Forge Labs - Paoli, Pennsylvania
=================================================================
From: vogelges@gibbs.physics.purdue.edu (Ralf Vogelgesang)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: cold light stabilizer, sources of ?
Date: 22 Jul 92 20:41:21 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Purdue University Physics Department

Hi,
  I'm asking this question on behalf of a friend of mine, who doesn't
have any account...

  My friend is interested in a 'super-stable' light source he needs
for exact reproducibility of his (b/w) prints.  He found a description
of a 'cold light stabilizer' invented by Prof.(?) Horowitz, Harward.

  The book doesn't give any details.  So here's my questions:

	does anybody know where to get such a thing?
	or how built it?
	any info about and pointers to sources are welcome!

please email answer,  THANKS -- Ralf

vogelges@physics.purdue.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: jrl8574@venus.tamu.edu (LINENSCHMIDT, JAMES ROBERT)
Subject: Needed: the correct developement times for Tech Pan
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 00:03:00 GMT

I am getting ready to develope a roll of Tech Pan 2415.  Can anyone give 
me the correct times for development using Technidol LC developer.  I 
need the ones from the Tech Pan box.  Thanks.

Robb.

James R. Linenschmidt              No amount of experimentation can ever
313 Lincoln St. #72                ever prove me right, but one 
College Station, TX 77840           experiment can prove me wrong.
(409)696-0725                               -- Albert Einstein
From: zawr02@hou.amoco.com (Andrew W. Robinson)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Focal length rip-off. Coincidence?
Date: 24 Jul 92 17:35:43 GMT
Reply-To: zawr02@hou.amoco.com
Organization: Amoco

In article 18590@drutx.ATT.COM, chuck@drutx.ATT.COM (LucianoC) writes:

>Have you ever put a ruler to a 2 by 4?

This is getting way off the subject, but a 2x4  is supposed to measure
2 inches by 4 inches *before* processing.  That is, the board starts out 2 x 4 
inches in rough form, but after planing and finishing, it winds up at about 1.5
x 3.5 inches.

Makes one wonder if lenses start out full length and then get planed down 
during manufacturing.  :-)

Andrew Robinson
--------------------------------------------------------------
So convenient a thing it is to be a reasonable creature, since
it enables one to find or make a reason for everything one has
a mind to do. - Benjamin Franklin
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: good@pixar.com (Any landing is a carrier landing if you forget to flare.)
Subject: Re: Spot meters
Organization: Pixar -- Point Richmond, California
Distribution: rec
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 23:39:16 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.002934.9180@odin.corp.sgi.com> donl@glass.esd.sgi.com (donl mathis) writes:

:|> Thoughts on the Minolta Spot-F or the (unmodified) Pentax digital?
:
:Both of these meters got similarly high marks in Dr. Henry's tests;
:they're both very good.  The Minolta is probably less suited for zone
:system work, because it doesn't seem to have a convenient means for
:place and fall.  Perhaps I'm wrong; I hope so!  Other than that, the
:Minolta appears to be a very good meter, and the ability to read flash
:is a Good Thing.

The ability to read flash is why I bought the Minola.  I handled the
place and fall business cheaply by building myself a little "whiz
wheel" out of the heavy paper of a file folder.  I suppose that for
slightly more effort I could build a cute one that would stick right to
the side of the meter, but when one is already lugging around a large
format setup one doesn't waste much sleep worrying about a tiny
cardboard whiz wheel.  

		--Craig
-- 
	good@pixar.com
-
Vote for a change this fall!  Don't fixate on the White House.
Vote all those Liberal Spendocrats out of Congress instead!
From: usenet@adobe.com (USENET NEWS)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Nikkor 180mm f2.8
Date: 27 Jul 92 22:22:05 GMT
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Originator: asanders@sparta

| ...they recommend each photog have a 35, 50, and 85 mm lense
| to do a wedding.
			-Bob

If your longest lens is 85mm, you've got to practically
stick the camera in people's faces to get anything like
a closeup portrait. I've gotten some of my best shots
while standing unobtrusively in the background. The
slight compression produced by the longer lens is a
small price to pay for the intimacy of closeup candids.

Photography isn't about technical correctness. It's
about capturing the moment. At least, that's how I
look at it.
		-Alan
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: quintero@athena.mit.edu (Peter Camenzind)
Subject: Re: How can I detect that my fixer is running out?
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 23:40:38 GMT

I think it's Edwal's hypo-check
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: chazl@county.lmt.mn.org
Subject: Estimates wanted
Reply-To: chazl@county.lmt.mn.org
Organization: LaserMaster Corp.
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 18:53:06 GMT

I have three Nikon bodies I may need to sell soon.  I would like some idea as
to the resale value of the three units.

1.  F3HP with MD-4
    Purchased in 1983 or so.  Very good shape, minimal brassing.
    Equipped with data back [MF-14, I think.  Sorry, posting from work
    and the cameras are at home].  In addition to the HP finder, it has
    a waist-level finder.

2.  FE-2
    Similar vintage and condition to above.

3.  FM
    Silver body, similar condition as prior two.

Please E-Mail responses.  Thank you.

chaz

chazl@county.lmt.mn.org
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: skimmel@amex-trs.com (Steve Kimmel)
Subject: Re: Novice questions: Reciprocity, EV
Organization: American Express Travel Related Services
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 02:13:48 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.153033.10774@craycos.com> sog@craycos.com (Steve Gombosi) writes:
>
>Basically, EV is a shorthand way of referring to all combinations of shutter
>speed and aperture that produce a given amount of exposure. A change of
>1 in EV correspond to a change of one "stop" in exposure.

The old zeiss syncro-compur shutters used in contaflex cameras and
old hasselblad lenses (don't know about any new hb equipment) had the
aperture and shutter speed linked together on the barrel of the lens.
around on the bottom side of the barrel were ev markings which were 
set from a light meeter.  Once the ev was set, turning the aperture ring
also turned the shutter speed ring so  5.6  8  16  22
                                       30  60 125 250 
moved as one.  Acutally it was a pretty convenient feature.


-- 
Steve Kimmel   N7ULW           Phoenix, AZ      |                         
Internet skimmel@amex-trs.com                   | my views only, in no way
UUCP	 uupsi!amexphx!skimmel                  | the views of my employer.
Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: duane@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (duane.galensky)
Subject: Re: Yashica T4
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 19:24:21 GMT

In article <5360769@hplsla.hp.com> andyc@hplsla.hp.com (Andy Cassino) writes:
>SPW103@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>| 
>| I own a Stylus.  ...And if people would just READ THE INSTRUCTION MANUAL,
>| they'd find out that it warns them to close the lens cover _slowly_ to give
>| the lens time to retract.
>| 
>|                               -Stephen Walker
>
>Thanks, I did not know this. However, personally, I don't think this is 
>Good Enough for a consumer item. Is Uncle Fred going to read the manual 
>before you hand him your Stylus to take a picture of you and your dog? 
>Are you going to remember to tell him, "close it slowly"?
>

and, even if uncle fred reads the manual, who knows whether
or not he'll remember every time...especially after he's
has a couple of beers...

not a good design...

duane
From: watters@darwin.genetics.washington.edu (Mike Watters)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: For Sale: Konica Autoreflex T3 w/ lens
Date: 21 Jul 92 05:03:12 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Jul21.050312.12505
Organization: University of Washington

FOR SALE:

	Konica AutoReflex A3 with Konica Hexanon AR 50mm f 1.7 lens

	The camera is in very good condition.  The only marks on it is a
little chipped paint on the lens housing.

	$100  OBO

	(Shipping not included)

mike
	 

--
Mike
watters@genetics.washington.edu
Dept of Genetics, Univ of Washington  Seattle
(d) 206-543-1934   (e) 206-361-1156
From: f88mattb@fy.chalmers.se (Mattias Bryntesson)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: a question about Velvia
Date: 28 Jul 92 12:21:47 GMT
Organization: Chalmers University of Technology, G|teborg, Sweden

In article <1992Jul27.072753.16484@sys.sweden.dg.com> robert@sys.sweden.dg.com (Robert Claeson) writes:
>In article <1992Jul23.095747.16915@fy.chalmers.se>, f88mattb@fy.chalmers.se (Mattias Bryntesson) writes:
>> In article <3097@ra.nrl.navy.mil> tse@ra.nrl.navy.mil (Anthony Tse) writes:
>> 
>> >never go back to Kodakchrome.  Everything look so pale, even with
>> >a polarizer on, there was hardly any color in the K25.  I'll stick
>> >with Fujichrome for scenics and Ektachrome for anything with skin.
>> 
>> I got some Kodachrome slides back yesterday and they had very rich,
>> saturated colors. Do you expose correctly? I think stopping down 2/3
>> or so would make your colors come. Kodachrome requires much more
...
>
>Underexposing Kodachrome certainly increases the color saturation *somewhat*,
>but at the same time, the slide becomes muddier and lots of details are
>lost in shadows. Ever tried photographing green foliage with a mix of sunlit
>and shadowed areas on underexposed Kodachrome (EI 80 or EI 100 for K64)?
>The shadows are black or nearly so and the highlights looks dead.

Yes, but contrast problems must be taken care of in other ways. Now
Anthony has too low color saturation, and that could have happened
due to overexposure.

Another reason could be bad processing. The Kodachrome process is fairly
complex, since the dyes are added during processing. With E6 films, the
dyes are in the film emulsion when you buy it (cheaper but harder to
get high resolution). Too short time in the dying baths or old chemicals
seems possible to me.

I've never had any problem with bad colors with Kodachrome, so this
is a new issue! In spite of this I'll switch to Velvia myself, my lab
does E6 all day so you can get your test shots and final shots on the
same day. (Theoretically, I'm not that fast ;-) Kodachrome must be
sent to Stockholm (or is it Bruxelles?) from here...

Mattias
From: jay@metran.UUCP (Jay Ts)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: E-6 with NO Jobo (Was: E-6 in Jobo)
Date: 25 Jul 92 22:04:43 GMT
Organization: Metran Technology, Tampa, Florida

robert@sys.sweden.dg.com (Robert Claeson) writes:
:
: Now, was it the Kodak Hobby-Pac that didn't include a stabilizer at all?

No.  The Hobby Pac includes a "Stabilizer II".

Now, I have a question for all you E-6 experts.  I have used the Hobby Pac
a few times, and want to improve on quality and cost-effectiveness.  This
means going for Kodak's gallon size E-6.  But I don't have a Jobo processor;
I just use a water bath and a stainless steel tank and try to keep the
bath around 105 deg. F.

Does anyone have enough experience with this method to warn me of some of
the pitfalls, or better yet, offer some advice?  I would love to hear from
you, since I am currently very antsy about investing money in the E-6
chemistry to try it out for myself.

How carefully do I *really* have to control the solution (especially
1st developer) temperatures?  I keep reading .1 or .5 degree.  What
happens if the temperature slowly (and monotonically) varies from
say, 106 to 104 degrees during the 5 minutes of 1st developer?  I
just tried that with the Hobby Pac, and can't see any problem (no
color shift or crossover apparent, anyway).

Also, if I agitate every 30 sec. with 5 inversions, is there a correction
for development (and other) times?  Or should I just use continuous agitation,
like the Jobo users?

Jay Ts
Tampa FL
uunet!myrddin!tscs!metran!jay
Newsgroups: rec.photo