Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Official Stuff The Lounge 
Thread started 23 Jul 2009 (Thursday) 22:48
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

The Film Thread (Red Ring not Required) A place for Analog Photography Nuts to Talk

 
DinosaurioAllie
Senior Member
Avatar
525 posts
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
     
Jun 26, 2011 18:24 |  #571

TheBurningCrown wrote in post #12661512 (external link)
Hm. And you've tried these negatives on other enlargers and they print correctly (just making sure)?

The other idea I came up with was that the mixing box was somehow screwed up, but I'm pretty sure the Besseler is a condenser, right?

The enlargers we're using are owned by the college they're located at so we're not allowed to adjust the format they're set to.

Honestly, I don't really know much about enlargers, and I don't even know what a "mixing box" or "condenser" is. :oops:


Here's some images off of some contacts sheets and some actual prints.

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: 400 | MIME changed to 'text/html'


IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: 400 | MIME changed to 'text/html'


IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: 400 | MIME changed to 'text/html'


IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: 400 | MIME changed to 'text/html'

Canon 7D | Canon 100mm f/2.8 | Canon 40mm f/2.8 | Mamiya RB67 | Mamiya Sekor 90mm f/3.8 | http://www.flickr.com/​mosbeckphotography (external link)
"There's a common misconception that all photographers want to photograph famous people, to be a paparazzi. To me that's like selling my soul. My photographs give thanks to people who have helped me out. Thats not selling my soul, that's gaining it." -Bob Campagna

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
TheBurningCrown
Goldmember
Avatar
4,882 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Oct 2008
     
Jun 26, 2011 20:45 |  #572

DinosaurioAllie wrote in post #12661742 (external link)
Here's some images off of some contacts sheets and some actual prints.

...those look fine to me?


-Dave
Gear List & Feedback
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DinosaurioAllie
Senior Member
Avatar
525 posts
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
     
Jun 26, 2011 20:57 |  #573

TheBurningCrown wrote in post #12662245 (external link)
...those look fine to me?

They didn't do it on any of the contact sheets as a separate enlarger was used, and the flipped image wasn't effected because the empty space was along the top bar. Here's the mainly effected image, as I corrected it on all the other ones.

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: 400 | MIME changed to 'text/html'


That was the print, and this is how the actual negative looked. The enlarger wouldn't go down any farther, therefore I had to select a very small portion of the image to print. You can also see the vignetting that was happening.

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: 400 | MIME changed to 'text/html'

Canon 7D | Canon 100mm f/2.8 | Canon 40mm f/2.8 | Mamiya RB67 | Mamiya Sekor 90mm f/3.8 | http://www.flickr.com/​mosbeckphotography (external link)
"There's a common misconception that all photographers want to photograph famous people, to be a paparazzi. To me that's like selling my soul. My photographs give thanks to people who have helped me out. Thats not selling my soul, that's gaining it." -Bob Campagna

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheBurningCrown
Goldmember
Avatar
4,882 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Oct 2008
     
Jun 26, 2011 21:11 |  #574

DinosaurioAllie wrote in post #12662302 (external link)
The enlarger wouldn't go down any farther, therefore I had to select a very small portion of the image to print.

That screams to me that there was something wrong with the enlarger and/or it wasn't set up properly for your negative size.


-Dave
Gear List & Feedback
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DinosaurioAllie
Senior Member
Avatar
525 posts
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
     
Jun 26, 2011 21:25 |  #575

TheBurningCrown wrote in post #12662388 (external link)
That screams to me that there was something wrong with the enlarger and/or it wasn't set up properly for your negative size.

My instructor assured me that he had set it to the correct settings for 120 film. So, I'm not quite exactly sure because I personally don't have much experience with enlargers.


Canon 7D | Canon 100mm f/2.8 | Canon 40mm f/2.8 | Mamiya RB67 | Mamiya Sekor 90mm f/3.8 | http://www.flickr.com/​mosbeckphotography (external link)
"There's a common misconception that all photographers want to photograph famous people, to be a paparazzi. To me that's like selling my soul. My photographs give thanks to people who have helped me out. Thats not selling my soul, that's gaining it." -Bob Campagna

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheBurningCrown
Goldmember
Avatar
4,882 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Oct 2008
     
Jun 26, 2011 21:38 |  #576

DinosaurioAllie wrote in post #12662470 (external link)
My instructor assured me that he had set it to the correct settings for 120 film. So, I'm not quite exactly sure because I personally don't have much experience with enlargers.

Don't always trust everything your instructor says. My first photography instructor told me that the difference between f/3.5 and f/4.0 was one stop. I told him that was ridiculous, and showed him the math to prove it. Go figure, he still didn't believe me.

Point is: if the enlarger is made to fit 120 film (that looks like 6x7?), there is no reason you should not be able to fit a full frame on an 8x10. It sounds like something was off.


-Dave
Gear List & Feedback
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DinosaurioAllie
Senior Member
Avatar
525 posts
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
     
Jun 26, 2011 21:53 |  #577

TheBurningCrown wrote in post #12662541 (external link)
Don't always trust everything your instructor says. My first photography instructor told me that the difference between f/3.5 and f/4.0 was one stop. I told him that was ridiculous, and showed him the math to prove it. Go figure, he still didn't believe me.

Point is: if the enlarger is made to fit 120 film (that looks like 6x7?), there is no reason you should not be able to fit a full frame on an 8x10. It sounds like something was off.

The printed bread image was a 5x7, but it was doing it at all sizes, even my 11x14. My instructor said that there would be cropping when printing 5x7's from 120 film, but the vignetting shouldn't be happening.

If I remember correctly, the negative holder that was originally in there was a square one. Would that make any difference?


Canon 7D | Canon 100mm f/2.8 | Canon 40mm f/2.8 | Mamiya RB67 | Mamiya Sekor 90mm f/3.8 | http://www.flickr.com/​mosbeckphotography (external link)
"There's a common misconception that all photographers want to photograph famous people, to be a paparazzi. To me that's like selling my soul. My photographs give thanks to people who have helped me out. Thats not selling my soul, that's gaining it." -Bob Campagna

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheBurningCrown
Goldmember
Avatar
4,882 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Oct 2008
     
Jun 26, 2011 22:01 |  #578

DinosaurioAllie wrote in post #12662630 (external link)
The printed bread image was a 5x7, but it was doing it at all sizes, even my 11x14. My instructor said that there would be cropping when printing 5x7's from 120 film, but the vignetting shouldn't be happening.

If I remember correctly, the negative holder that was originally in there was a square one. Would that make any difference?

Well - if you're making 5x7's from a 6x7 negative, then yes there will be cropping. From what you described, I thought that you could see the full image but couldn't bring the head down any further. But if you cannot see the full image through the enlarger, then something is definitely wrong.

Did the negative holder fit the whole image?

Do you know what lens you were using?

Do you know how the bellows on the enlarger were set?


-Dave
Gear List & Feedback
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Cuypers1807
Intact?
Avatar
1,734 posts
Likes: 174
Joined May 2008
Location: Equally far from everything!
     
Jun 26, 2011 22:31 as a reply to  @ TheBurningCrown's post |  #579

Finally got to develop my first few 4x5 shots.... Here is the first scan:
Chamonix 045n-2
Schneider 150mm 5.6
Delta 100
D76 1+1
V700

Subject not great... I actually expected to ruin this in development......


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Joby
Flickr (external link)_________My Site (external link)___________Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DinosaurioAllie
Senior Member
Avatar
525 posts
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
     
Jun 26, 2011 22:41 |  #580

TheBurningCrown wrote in post #12662680 (external link)
Well - if you're making 5x7's from a 6x7 negative, then yes there will be cropping. From what you described, I thought that you could see the full image but couldn't bring the head down any further. But if you cannot see the full image through the enlarger, then something is definitely wrong.

Did the negative holder fit the whole image?

Do you know what lens you were using?

Do you know how the bellows on the enlarger were set?

The negative holder did in fact fit the whole image, but I'm not sure what lens I was using or what specific setting the bellows were set to. But I remember adjusting the bellows and not getting any better results.

I drew up a diagram of what I remember seeing, to help communicate the problem better.

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i254.photobucke​t.com …ild66636/EaselD​iagram.png (external link)

Canon 7D | Canon 100mm f/2.8 | Canon 40mm f/2.8 | Mamiya RB67 | Mamiya Sekor 90mm f/3.8 | http://www.flickr.com/​mosbeckphotography (external link)
"There's a common misconception that all photographers want to photograph famous people, to be a paparazzi. To me that's like selling my soul. My photographs give thanks to people who have helped me out. Thats not selling my soul, that's gaining it." -Bob Campagna

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheBurningCrown
Goldmember
Avatar
4,882 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Oct 2008
     
Jun 26, 2011 22:53 |  #581

DinosaurioAllie wrote in post #12662881 (external link)
I drew up a diagram of what I remember seeing, to help communicate the problem better.

That's a little confusing - so it didn't show the whole image, or did it?


-Dave
Gear List & Feedback
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DinosaurioAllie
Senior Member
Avatar
525 posts
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
     
Jun 26, 2011 22:55 |  #582

TheBurningCrown wrote in post #12662936 (external link)
That's a little confusing - so it didn't show the whole image, or did it?

In the negative holder, the whole image was visible. Once put inside the enlarger, it did not project the whole image. The bottom would be cut off. The pink is what should have been projected(the whole image), the blue is what was actually being projected, or the cut off image.


Canon 7D | Canon 100mm f/2.8 | Canon 40mm f/2.8 | Mamiya RB67 | Mamiya Sekor 90mm f/3.8 | http://www.flickr.com/​mosbeckphotography (external link)
"There's a common misconception that all photographers want to photograph famous people, to be a paparazzi. To me that's like selling my soul. My photographs give thanks to people who have helped me out. Thats not selling my soul, that's gaining it." -Bob Campagna

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheBurningCrown
Goldmember
Avatar
4,882 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Oct 2008
     
Jun 26, 2011 22:59 |  #583

DinosaurioAllie wrote in post #12662948 (external link)
In the negative holder, the whole image was visible. Once put inside the enlarger, it did not project the whole image. The bottom would be cut off. The pink is what should have been projected(the whole image), the blue is what was actually being projected, or the cut off image.

It's a hunch, but the condensing lens may be out of place/not level. That's just an inexperienced guess, though.


-Dave
Gear List & Feedback
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CAL ­ Imagery
Goldmember
Avatar
3,375 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Apr 2008
Location: O-H
     
Jun 28, 2011 16:22 |  #584

I have Neopan 400 frozen for the past two years, and it expired last fall. Would it still be "good" because of it being in my freezer? TIA.


Christian

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Cuypers1807
Intact?
Avatar
1,734 posts
Likes: 174
Joined May 2008
Location: Equally far from everything!
     
Jun 28, 2011 16:29 |  #585

yes


Joby
Flickr (external link)_________My Site (external link)___________Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

835,808 views & 1,071 likes for this thread
The Film Thread (Red Ring not Required) A place for Analog Photography Nuts to Talk
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Official Stuff The Lounge 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is gavesh99
1014 guests, 358 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.