Calumet?

wrote:
In article rs.com,
Padu wrote:


I'm very lucky then. Two blocks from my office there's a pro lab
(http://www.chromedigital.com/) that develops E-6 4x5.


I could drive there if I had to. Hope they stick around.


Anyway, I think for starters I'll get a polaroid back until I get
confortable with all the controls of my new calumet.


Priced the polaroid film lately?


Chrome actually have two different locations. The other one is in
Sorrento Valley. After the closure of Chromacolor on India Street,
Chrome found themselves quite busy. However, you can still get a
turn-around time on 4x5 E-6 of three hours . . . not bad at all.

http://www.chromedigital.com Check the website for location directions
and times. They don't only process film, and I feel are quite good at
printing.

My suggestion to Padu of the type 405 holder was to cut the per shot
Polaroid cost a bit. While not the least expensive way to shoot, it is
better than wasting a 4x5 when you want to check exposure or lighting.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio
http://www.allgstudio.com

Anyway, I think for starters I'll get a polaroid back until I get
confortable with all the controls of my new calumet.

Priced the polaroid film lately?



Yes, not cheap I know, but I think I'll learn the mechanics of the camera
faster that way (and probably saving on the long run).

Cheers

Padu

"Padu" wrote in message
vers.com...
[SNIP]

For now I'll be shooting polaroids, and I'll keep learning until I can
decide which type of holder I will feel more confortable with.


You can use Fuji Quickloads in a Kodak Readyload holder, but it doesn't work
well the other way round. You can also sort of use either in a Polaroid
holder, but this doesn't work reliably well for me, and it doesn't seem to
hold the film as flat either.

So I use a Polaroid holder for Polaroid, and a Kodak Readyload holder for
both Fuji Quickload and Kodak Readyload packs. (As well as conventional
DDSs to keep costs down in the studio, using Quickloads all the time is
expensive.) This combination is simple, and works very well.



Peter

Bandicoot wrote:
"Padu" wrote in message
vers.com...
[SNIP]


For now I'll be shooting polaroids, and I'll keep learning until I can
decide which type of holder I will feel more confortable with.



You can use Fuji Quickloads in a Kodak Readyload holder, but it doesn't work
well the other way round. You can also sort of use either in a Polaroid
holder, but this doesn't work reliably well for me, and it doesn't seem to
hold the film as flat either.

So I use a Polaroid holder for Polaroid, and a Kodak Readyload holder for
both Fuji Quickload and Kodak Readyload packs. (As well as conventional
DDSs to keep costs down in the studio, using Quickloads all the time is
expensive.) This combination is simple, and works very well.



Peter




Yeah, I have tested both Readyloads in Quickload holders, and Quickloads
in the Readyload holder. In both cases, the opposite system holder makes
an okay back-up for the proper one. The fit is a bit snug, and if you
ever insert the film packet wrong way around, the holder will jamb. It
can work, but your best bet is the proper holder to match each film.

What I don't like about the Polaroid 545 holders is the lack of a
pressure plate. I think film flatness is much better with a Readyload or
Quickload holder. Neither of those is as heavy as the Polaroid holder,
so no problem to carry both.

I don't mind the cost, since I pass that on to each client. The lack of
worry and convenience make Quickloads and Readyloads a more streamlined
solution than double darkslide conventional holders.

When I want to use a film not available in Quickload or Readyload, often
I simply use a Linhof Super Rollex back with 120 roll film. While that
is a cropped 56mm by 76mm view (6x7), the results still enlarge or scan
nicely.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio
http://www.allgstudio.com

Got it in the mail yesterday. It's in pristine condition!

Now I'm waiting for my lens and polaroid holder in the mail to start
shooting.


Cheers

Padu

In article ,
Gordon Moat wrote:


What I don't like about the Polaroid 545 holders is the lack of a
pressure plate. I think film flatness is much better with a Readyload or
Quickload holder.


Gordon Moat
A G Studio
http://www.allgstudio.com

I don't know about the newer 545i backs but I shot a lot of 4x5 in
August 2005 when I was in California. I had concerns because I typically
load film. I also had not used the old 545 back for much 4x5 until the
trip. I would like to do a comparison to see if any better by using
holders....in my particular case of the trip I see no sharpness
problems.
--
George W. Bush is the President Quayle we never had.

Gregory Blank wrote:
In article ,
Gordon Moat wrote:


What I don't like about the Polaroid 545 holders is the lack of a
pressure plate. I think film flatness is much better with a Readyload or
Quickload holder.



Gordon Moat
A G Studio
http://www.allgstudio.com


I don't know about the newer 545i backs but I shot a lot of 4x5 in
August 2005 when I was in California. I had concerns because I typically
load film. I also had not used the old 545 back for much 4x5 until the
trip. I would like to do a comparison to see if any better by using
holders....in my particular case of the trip I see no sharpness
problems.


When I do fashion and lifestyle shots on 4x5, I tend to shoot wide open,
or sometimes only stopped down as far as f8.0. These are different
working conditions than many 4x5 users consider normal. I think when you
stop down further that it might be less of an issue. It would be
interesting to see a comparison, though subjectively it seems more
logical that a pressure plate would serve some useful purpose in a holder.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio
http://www.allgstudio.com

In article ,
Gordon Moat wrote:

When I do fashion and lifestyle shots on 4x5, I tend to shoot wide open,
or sometimes only stopped down as far as f8.0. These are different
working conditions than many 4x5 users consider normal. I think when you
stop down further that it might be less of an issue. It would be
interesting to see a comparison, though subjectively it seems more
logical that a pressure plate would serve some useful purpose in a holder.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio
http://www.allgstudio.com

Then again blurry out of focus Bokeh can be interesting for that sort
of stuff
--
George W. Bush is the President Quayle we never had.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Nermal"
Note: the lab that does my 2 1/4 film has to send the sheet film to an
outside laboratory. The last time (12 years ago) the turn-around time for
Ektachrome slides was 8 days. Ektacolor processing (with contact sheet
only) takes 7 days.

If anyone else has such problems, I've run a lab here in NJ for thirty
years and we're still offering dip and dunk rush processing of both E6
and C41 films. We can process up to 11x14 sheets of either. We process
and return film that's sent to us the same day we get it. We also do
drum scans from originals up to 8x10.

john c.
tech photo & imaging
www.technicalphoto.com