Still using medium format

On 7 Aug 2006 10:41:01 -0700, "nathantw"
wrote:

Welcome to medium format. You'll love it, especially when you start
shooting slides and b/w film. Slides are just incredible to see on the
lightbox.

Indeed they are. Pity MF projectors are so expensive.

Bandicoot wrote:
Getting a roll of slides film back and plonking the sheet down on the
light-box for the first time is a continuing source of joy - like being a
child coming downstairs on Christmas day to the pile of presents under the
tree. Except it doesn't only happen once a year.

How right you are about that. In fact, I've looked over my slides taken
in Alaska over and over again. I just seem to find more things in the
slide I missed each time I look at them with the 8x loupe, especially
when looking at the glaciers. In fact, I still get a kick out of
looking at slides I created years and years ago.

I may print them out, but I'm going to bypass Ilfochrome for the first
time ever and try to print them out on a Lightjet. I heard good things
about Calypso Imaging so I may try them. From what I heard, since I've
never done it before, is that slides print out much, much better when
scanned and printed. When printing Ilfochrome without a contrast mask
the final print's details looked pretty much like a projected
image...with the lights on. In other words if details are barely
discernable with the lights on that's basically what you'll get on the
printed image. Mind you, the blacks will be jet black and everything
will be sharper than sharp because it's a direct to print method, but
the minute shadow details could be lost. Printing from a scanned image
supposedly brings out those details. So I'm looking forward to trying
that out. I may end up reprinting all my slides.

In article . com,
"sr3" wrote:



finder and wonder how to get my brain to work backwards - since
everything seems to be reversed in the focusing screen.

Once you get it like that you don't want it any other which way.

I live near the mountains of North Carolina and look forward to hauling
this old camera and a tri-pod up to the Blue Ridge Parkway to see what
kind of photos I can capture. I'm brand spanking new to medium format
and can't wait to learn more about it!

You really need a LF camera, the surroundings really demand it- I envy
your location. One of my favorite stories is setting up the 4x5 Toyo E
on a slippery boulder in light rain at Nantahala NP at WW Falls the drop
was a cool 555 plus drop off the front side where I was set up. My
brother can attest it was plain nutzo to drag the 30 pound plywood box
out of the car and hustle it past the signage warning of the potentially
dangerous fall. Hey even though the light sucked I set the camera and
got the shot.

Here's a good look.

http://www.cs.unca.edu/nfsnc/recreat...waterfalls.htm
--
Reality-Is finding that perfect picture
and never looking back.

www.gregblankphoto.com

In article .com,
"nathantw" wrote:


A word from the wise, whatever you do, don't go flying in a small plane
and try to take pictures from the waist level finder. Believe me, the
motion of you going forward, while the image in the viewfinder going
backwards will make your sense of orientation bonkers. That was enough
to make my plane trip stop being fun.

Easier & Better than that try a swing set sometime feet on the swing
look down...puke city
--
Reality-Is finding that perfect picture
and never looking back.

www.gregblankphoto.com

On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 18:30:25 -0400, "Greg \"_\""
wrote:


Here's a good look.

http://www.cs.unca.edu/nfsnc/recreat...waterfalls.htm


Huh. The web page calls it "the highest waterfall east of the
Rockies" at 411 feet.

But here's Amicalola falls in Georgia (essentially the southern
end of the Appalachian Trail) claiming the same thing,
("the tallest cascading waterfall east of the Mississippi River")
and its height is given as 729 feet.

http://www.gastateparks.org/info/amicalola/


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com

In article ,
Raphael Bustin wrote:

On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 18:30:25 -0400, "Greg \"_\""
wrote:


Here's a good look.

http://www.cs.unca.edu/nfsnc/recreat...waterfalls.htm


Huh. The web page calls it "the highest waterfall east of the
Rockies" at 411 feet.

But here's Amicalola falls in Georgia (essentially the southern
end of the Appalachian Trail) claiming the same thing,
("the tallest cascading waterfall east of the Mississippi River")
and its height is given as 729 feet.

http://www.gastateparks.org/info/amicalola/


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com

I think the 411 drop is for the upper part of the falls there are two
sections- but I didn't measure or for that matter make the claim
--
Reality-Is finding that perfect picture
and never looking back.

www.gregblankphoto.com

sr3 wrote:


I live near the mountains of North Carolina and look forward to hauling
this old camera and a tri-pod up to the Blue Ridge Parkway to see what
kind of photos I can capture. I'm brand spanking new to medium format
and can't wait to learn more about it!


Scott, you might check out Carolinas Nature Photographers Association.

http://www.cnpa.org/

They have a strong chapter in Asheville NC, and another in Charlotte,
NC. They host frequent fieldtrips into the NC mountains and will share
lots of information about some of the hidden goodies.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/089...lance&n=283155

Kevin Adams is one of our members.

nathantw wrote:
A word from the wise, whatever you do, don't go flying in a small plane
and try to take pictures from the waist level finder. Believe me, the
motion of you going forward, while the image in the viewfinder going
backwards will make your sense of orientation bonkers. That was enough
to make my plane trip stop being fun.


No problem there, I have enough trouble flying in a big plane, although
I'd love to give a big, slow balloon trip a try!

Bandicoot wrote:
Getting a roll of slides film back and plonking the sheet down on the
light-box for the first time is a continuing source of joy - like being a
child coming downstairs on Christmas day to the pile of presents under the
tree. Except it doesn't only happen once a year.

One of my problems at the moment is finding film and a place to process
it. I live in Charlotte and stopped by a local Wolf Camera. I bought
their only two rolls of 120 - both rolls were B&W film, one ISO 100 and
the other 400. It appears they were on the shelf for a year or two.

I used the 400 first just to figure out how to load the camera and see
what works and then dropped it off at QC Gallery Works
[http://qcgalleryworks.com/] for processing. That's where I learned
that getting this film developed is an a la cart method - one price for
processing, another for proof prints and a third for scan services!

The lowest cost method seemed to be processing ($6/roll) and low res
scanning. ($5/roll). They suggested proof prints and offered 4x6, 4x5
or 5x5 sizes. I had no idea what size I need so we just went for the
scanning for now.

Scott, you might check out Carolinas Nature Photographers Association.

http://www.cnpa.org/

They have a strong chapter in Asheville NC, and another in Charlotte,
NC. They host frequent fieldtrips into the NC mountains and will share
lots of information about some of the hidden goodies.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/089...lance&n=283155

Kevin Adams is one of our members.

Thanks! I'm all over it!

All this talk reminds me of an article in the Charlotte Observer, May
18 1997, titled Peak Performance. They described the 13 most
interesting mountain peaks around the Charlotte area. The article
covered places in four different states from Black Rock Mtn in GA all
the way up to Stone Mountain near West Jefferson, North Carolina.

The trip was about 1200 miles and we did it in two days. I'd love to do
it again in slow motion, perhaps taking a week and dozens of rolls of
film. The hard part though is we now have three small kids and they (or
is it me) don't have the patience for a road trip of that length.

Stone Mountain was the most surprising peak of the whole trip and still
one of our favorites...

http://ils.unc.edu/parkproject/visit/stmo/home.html

Scott