OK, and then what do you do with it after that? And what do you do with the
steel wool? Inquiring minds want to know...
M Billingslea
>
> Actually, for the typical darkroom user, the amount of fixer used is probably
> not going to be a problem. In high concentrations and in septic tanks this
In a message dated 9/8/2002 9:16:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
kelca...@aol.com writes:
> what kind or brand of developer, stop bath, and fixer I should use in order
> to get the best results with ilford paper?
>
>
I've had really good results in my home darkroom with Ilford Multigrade
Deve
I've used C-41 process black and white film for 35mm (mainly for street
photography and informal portrait work). Although I have a roll of 120 slated
for use in my Zero multiformat pinhole camera, I haven't had a chance to try
it out yet. That being said,
I've tried Ilford's XP2, Kodak's Portra
In a message dated 7/21/2002 1:16:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
ragowar...@btinternet.com writes:
> I use the formula, y=.91x^1.51, where x is the metered time and y is the
> corrected time. It approximates the reciprocity pretty closely, and has
> worked for me for exposures up to 2 hours on FP
OK,
This has probably been discussed recently, but can anyone out there recommend
a good formula/rule of thumb for adjusting exposure for reciprocity in Ilford
films? The technical data on their webpage is merely a chart, and I am
hoping to get more specific information, based on the experienc
I had a flight last September (shortly after 9-11), and found it easiest to
run the (unloaded) cameras in their bag through the x-ray, but to ask them to
hand-check the film. They weren't happy about it - they tried to tell me that
their x-ray machines were safe for any film speeds up to greater
In a message dated 12/7/01 1:16:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, ben...@qwest.net
writes:
<< Well, I paid $35 for my Diana, just to see what the fuss was about...
And the only two pictures I've so far had in a show were taken with it.
Go figure >>
Well, I paid around fifteen bucks for a Ho
In a message dated 12/5/2001 9:18:42 PM Eastern Standard Time,
aschm...@warwick.net writes:
<< but what do you do when it's raining...
8o) >>
Hey, developing and printing, of course!
;-)
Maggie
(snip)
<>
Yes, I've been really impressed with what I've read about the Zero Image 4x5.
That's why I've asked for one for Christmas. That's also why I don't want to
build my own at this point - I really like the fact that it is a flexible
system (not to mention the lack of time - I'd rather
I am asking for a Zero Image 4 x 5 pinhole camera for Christmas - and I know
that I'll need a film holder for it. My experience up until this point has
been 35mm and medium format, and I don't have much knowledge of large format,
so . . .
Any suggestions on the best type of film holder to get?
In a message dated 11/13/2001 10:21:43 AM Eastern Standard Time,
geme...@hotmail.com writes:
<< I do not think eather 116 or 616 film is made; only 120 today. >>
Actually, it is still available through specialty film mail-order companies.
It's pricey, though.
Maggie
In a message dated 11/8/2001 1:50:44 PM Eastern Standard Time,
james...@aol.com writes:
<< You bought a filmless classic. The 127 film was discontinued by Kodak in
the
mid-90s. It took 8 pictures with a negative tha gave a wallet sized contact
print it could also take 12 square pictures a
12 matches
Mail list logo
