[kwkarth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rb67 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just discovered this thread. My Traser P6500

Hey rb,
Since photography is listed as one of your interests, would your handle have anything to do with a camera made by Mamiya?

 

[rb67]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwkarth /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hey rb, Since photography is listed as one of your interests, would your handle have anything to do with a camera made by Mamiya?

Yup

I got my RB67 off of ebay a few years ago after taking a camera engineering class. Now, I've semi-switched over to DSLR so my Mamiya is sitting at home (in LV) all alone

Paying to have 120 film developed/printed just got too expensive, and the Mamiya isn't exactly the definition of portable photography

But man, I haven't found a match for landscapes done with Fuji Velvia 50....

(sorry for derailing this thread)

 

[mrarroyo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rb67 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yup I got my RB67 off of ebay a few years ago after taking a camera engineering class. Now, I've semi-switched over to DSLR so my Mamiya is sitting at home (in LV) all alone Paying to have 120 film developed/printed just got too expensive, and the Mamiya isn't exactly the definition of portable photography But man, I haven't found a match for landscapes done with Fuji Velvia 50.... (sorry for derailing this thread)

120 and 220 film is so much more for very expressive pictures that 35 mm could never capture. My only venture into it was with an older twin lens Yashica Mat 124G. Man I still miss that cheap camera.

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rb67 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yup I got my RB67 off of ebay a few years ago after taking a camera engineering class. Now, I've semi-switched over to DSLR so my Mamiya is sitting at home (in LV) all alone Paying to have 120 film developed/printed just got too expensive, and the Mamiya isn't exactly the definition of portable photography But man, I haven't found a match for landscapes done with Fuji Velvia 50.... (sorry for derailing this thread)

That was a nice camera. I used one when I was a photographer back in '74.
We also shot a lot of 4x5 sheet film in speed graphic cameras as well as a fair amount of 8x10 sheet film in a couple of wooden studio cameras we had.

It's hard to beat large format negatives for real depth. Can't you get a digital back for the RB?

 

[rb67]

Man, I would love to work with an 8x10 one day. Being able to make a contact print that big would just be amazing. Also, perspective control seems really fun and i'm sure there are a ton of creative avenues you can take. (although there are perspective control lenses for the RB, i don't think anything can be really comparable to the flexibility of large format)

Two things I really miss about film.
1. Crummy dynamic range. Since I mainly do landscapes, it's pretty easy for me to snap a bunch of exposures and then use HDR to increase the dynamic range. However, film just seems to present it in a more realistic way... Maybe I just need to brush up my photoshop skills.

2. Being able to physically hold something. There just is something about a negative or slide, whether it be 35mm or 4x5, that makes the experience much more enjoyable. It's a physical representation of the experience you had while taking the picture, not a print. In digital, it's just a whole bunch of bits

Indeed you can get a digital back for the RB. Creo Leaf is one that I know of. Unfortunately they run well over $10k

 

[rb67]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrarroyo /img/forum/go_quote.gif 120 and 220 film is so much more for very expressive pictures that 35 mm could never capture. My only venture into it was with an older twin lens Yashica Mat 124G. Man I still miss that cheap camera.

Oh man, the Yashica is a classic! I'm sure it was so much fun! Twin lenses are a blast

 

[ronin74]

This thread is all over the place, but let me add to the mess.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rb67 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yup I got my RB67 off of ebay a few years ago after taking a camera engineering class. Now, I've semi-switched over to DSLR so my Mamiya is sitting at home (in LV) all alone Paying to have 120 film developed/printed just got too expensive, and the Mamiya isn't exactly the definition of portable photography But man, I haven't found a match for landscapes done with Fuji Velvia 50.... (sorry for derailing this thread)

I love medium format, trying to activate a 2-1/4 space is my ultimate photographic challenge (ref. Michael Kenna). I also have a Rollei 6006.

RB67: luckily I found a manual on ebay to work the dmn thing. A great piece of machinery. Not portable but also not battery (or memory)dependant, all manual (sort of), all mechanical. And the images have such fidelity when compared to digital, analogous to mp3 vs LP (this is still head-fi).

Film processing: The only way for hobbyist to get it done economically is to do it yourself. It's not any harder than opamp rolling.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwkarth /img/forum/go_quote.gif That was a nice camera. I used one when I was a photographer back in '74. We also shot a lot of 4x5 sheet film in speed graphic cameras as well as a fair amount of 8x10 sheet film in a couple of wooden studio cameras we had. It's hard to beat large format negatives for real depth. Can't you get a digital back for the RB?

I picked up a stray speed graphic with a Polaroid back and a couple dozen boxes of polaroid film. Had a blast trying to figure out how this thing worked. You need a light meter for sure or be adept with the f64 rule.

 

[rb67]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronin74 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Film processing: The only way for hobbyist to get it done economically is to do it yourself. It's not any harder than opamp rolling.

I definitely want to give it a shot. Unfortunately, I don't have a house where I can experiment with this stuff, and the univ. photo lab is strictly art students only.... It sounds like great fun, hopefully by the time I begin home ownership many years down the road, they'll still be making all the chemicals and hardware to process my own film!

Question: how much involved is developing of slide film compared to negative? I love Velvia

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronin74 /img/forum/go_quote.gif This thread is all over the place, but let me add to the mess. I love medium format, trying to activate a 2-1/4 space is my ultimate photographic challenge (ref. Michael Kenna). I also have a Rollei 6006. RB67: luckily I found a manual on ebay to work the dmn thing. A great piece of machinery. Not portable but also not battery (or memory)dependant, all manual (sort of), all mechanical. And the images have such fidelity when compared to digital, analogous to mp3 vs LP (this is still head-fi). Film processing: The only way for hobbyist to get it done economically is to do it yourself. It's not any harder than opamp rolling. I picked up a stray speed graphic with a Polaroid back and a couple dozen boxes of polaroid film. Had a blast trying to figure out how this thing worked. You need a light meter for sure or be adept with the f64 rule.

That's pretty cool. I had a number of backs for the speed graphic "bodies."
We virtually never shot polaroid, but we had those backs for our speed graphics as well as for the Mamiya's. The speed graphics came in a couple of flavors too. You could get range finder or wire frame view-finders. The range finders were very typical for the day, but the wire frames were cool. They forced you to either carry an external range finder (we never or rarely did) or learn how to estimate distances by eye and pre-set the focus. That's what we did. There's nothing more liberating in photography than to not have to worry about distance, exposure, and the like. You can just concentrate on the action and shoot the exact right moment. The wire frame gives you peripheral vision like you wouldn't believe, so you see everything around you so you can better follow the action. With the large format negative, you've got room to crop back in the dark room. It was all totally a different mind set than today's photographic activities.

The hassel was being able to manage the film quickly. Never forget the dark slide!

We had slide film changers too, but they jammed often, then you needed a darkroom to unjam them.

 

[ronin74]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rb67 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I definitely want to give it a shot. Unfortunately, I don't have a house where I can experiment with this stuff, and the univ. photo lab is strictly art students only.... It sounds like great fun, hopefully by the time I begin home ownership many years down the road, they'll still be making all the chemicals and hardware to process my own film! Question: how much involved is developing of slide film compared to negative? I love Velvia

The E-6 process (I believe all Fuji slides are E-6) is almost as easy as b/w. There are starter kits (small batch chemistry) where you don't need a darkroom, just a light-tight changing bag.

http://www.jobousadarkroom.com/instr...rocess_e-6.htm

 

[ronin74]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwkarth /img/forum/go_quote.gif That's pretty cool. I had a number of backs for the speed graphic "bodies." We virtually never shot polaroid, but we had those backs for our speed graphics as well as for the Mamiya's. The speed graphics came in a couple of flavors too. You could get range finder or wire frame view-finders. The range finders were very typical for the day, but the wire frames were cool. They forced you to either carry an external range finder (we never or rarely did) or learn how to estimate distances by eye and pre-set the focus. That's what we did. There's nothing more liberating in photography than to not have to worry about distance, exposure, and the like. You can just concentrate on the action and shoot the exact right moment. The wire frame gives you peripheral vision like you wouldn't believe, so you see everything around you so you can better follow the action. With the large format negative, you've got room to crop back in the dark room. It was all totally a different mind set than today's photographic activities. The hassel was being able to manage the film quickly. Never forget the dark slide! We had slide film changers too, but they jammed often, then you needed a darkroom to unjam them.

I had no inexpensive way to process and enlarge the 4x5s, so the polaroids were a cheap way to learn.

Mine does not have the wire view finder, but I think Jimmie Olsen had one.

 

[badpenny]

I love shooting 120 film. The square format is so logical. The thing I still can't get over, is how much dynamic range film has (I usually use Illford B&W 120). Digital still has some room to grow in that respect.

 

[ilikemonkeys]

Any love for the Contax 645?

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronin74 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I had no inexpensive way to process and enlarge the 4x5s, so the polaroids were a cheap way to learn. Mine does not have the wire view finder, but I think Jimmie Olsen had one.

LOL! Yeah, I think Jimmy was the guy! We shot almost exclusively AGFA B&W in sheet film. For color portraits, I would shoot B&W negs, retouch the negative by hand with a highly sharpened pencil to remove blemishes, etc. and print sepia tone prints, which I would then hand color with photographic oils. It was really cool to be able to experience all of that. There was some creative magic to it all, and by the time you had the portrait completed, you had invested something of yourself into that work of art. I loved it.

We souped all our sheet film negatives in battery tanks using stainless steel negative carriers. I could develop maybe a dozen sheets of film at once that way. I did passport photos while you wait by shooting a couple shots with the studio camera on a split frame using a slide back. Then I souped the negative. When the neg was pulled out of the fixative, I would rinse, go out to the customer, have them pick their favorite of the two. Then I would cut the negative, slap it between a couple sheets of glass, throw it in the enlarger, and print a 2x3. Once the print was souped, I would dry it with a hair dryer and give it to the customer. fun

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ilikemonkeys /img/forum/go_quote.gif Any love for the Contax 645?

Sweet camera, although not in Hasselblad territory.

Fairly compact for a medium format camera and quieter mirror than the one on the Pentax 67. I've never had the pleasure of actually working with the Contax, but I did handle it in the shops back in the day.