First 11x14 Prints are in!!

[alec4444]

Finally got two sheets of 11x14 shot and processed. To avoid any confusion on where any screw ups may have occured, I had the film developed at MV Labs in NYC. This means any screw ups on the negative were all me. =)

And there were screwups....enought to make my LF Print Exchange Group groan and wonder whether I'm going to be giving them crap in January. But I think the mistakes were consistent, and I'm just getting started! Don't worry, I'll have this cleared up soon!

My scanner isn't big enough for 11x14, so I'm attaching digital pics of the photos. Despite what you may see in the poor quality digital photos, everything seems fine except for the loss of image at the bottom of each frame. The fountain shot employed little rise, so I'm guessing the bellows sagged and got in the way. The building shot (underexposed) required a TON of rise. I'm guessing that the error I'm seeing may be a combination of bellows sag + I ran out of image circle. These shots were using the 360mm Symmar Convertible lens with a specified image circle of 500mm. I was stopped down to f45 in both shots. I would have thought that it would have provided plenty of rise for the building shot...am I overlooking something?

Notes to self for this weekend's attempt:

1) Get a spot meter so I don't under expose again. Or average light + shadows on the Seikonic L-358.
2) Bring loupe.
3) Check all four corners of the ground glass to make sure I'm seeing an image. Try to estimate how much rise I can get before I lose image.

Any other tips? Do you know of any lenses that will give me a bigger image cirsle in this focal length? The building shot is a great example of how I want to use this camera.....LOVE ARCHITECTURE!

Still determined!
--A

[Oren Grad]

Alec -

A rated image circle of 500mm actually doesn't allow for all that much movement on 11x14 if the subject is near infinity. The diagonal of an 11x14 negative is around 425mm. You can do the trigonometry yourself, but that certainly doesn't leave room for a "ton" of rise. Something like an inch and a half or so would be more like it.

But the convertible Symmar may be giving you more than 500mm anyway. The shadows in your pictures don't look like running out of coverage, they look like bellows sag.

Re the metering, you don't need a spot meter, you just need to learn to use your incident meter properly. In my LF snapshooting I use an incident meter (the wonderful Sekonic L-308) exclusively after having tried a spot meter earlier in my photo-life. In the end you may decide a spot meter is your preference, but it's not a magic fix for not having finished your learning about how to use a meter effectively.

Don't despair - with your natural inclination to plunge right in and keep asking questions as you go, you'll zip up the steep part of that learning curve before you know it!

[Ron Marshall]

The compositions are interesting, that is what matters. The rest will come with time. Enjoy!

[Ole Tjugen]

From my experience with Symmars, Schneider's stated coverage is (for once) pretty exact. A 150mm Symmar leaves exactly 0 room for movements on 5x7", the 210 the same on 18x24cm - it doesn't quite cover 8x10".

I don't have a 360 to test on 12x16" (30x40cm), but the 300mm does not cover by about 2 inches in the corners, consistent with the stated 402mm coverage (30x40cm needs 500mm).

[alec4444]

So Ole, that would mean then that the new Symmar-S, with a stated coverage of 491mm might actually be bigger than the symmar convertible? If that's true, that's a good fact to know....

--A

[David A. Goldfarb]

I agree with Oren that your vignetting problem isn't image circle--it's bellows impingement. Gather the loose bellows toward the front standard, and that should take care of it. Some bellows have loops and straps for this purpose, but if yours doesn't, it's not hard to make your own out of things like ribbon and small metal rings or D-rings. Another thing you can do is support the bellows with something like a box or a large sponge between the bellows and the camera bed.

[sanking]

I agree with Oren that your vignetting problem isn't image circle--it's bellows impingement. Gather the loose bellows toward the front standard, and that should take care of it. Some bellows have loops and straps for this purpose, but if yours doesn't, it's not hard to make your own out of things like ribbon and small metal rings or D-rings. Another thing you can do is support the bellows with something like a box or a large sponge between the bellows and the camera bed.

Same thought here. The vignetting problem is from sag in the bellows, not from the lens. Even with the camera in vertical orientation you should have about three inches of rise or fall with a 360mm Symmar Convertible lens on 11X14.

The 360mm Symmar Convertible throws an image circle of over 600mm when stopped down to f/45. I know this for a fact because I used a 360mm Symmar Convertible on 12X20 for a few years and it covered the entire format with no vignetting. It is possible that different shutter mounting my cause mechanical vignetting, but most of the 360mm Symmars of this period are in the the large Compound shutter, as was mine.

Sandy King

[Jim Galli]

Alec, does your ground glass have the corners cut out? That is a feature I simply cannot live without. I don't think you ran out of image circle on either photo. If you look into the camera through the cut corners on a ground glass you can easily see whether you have a staight shot through the aperture with no obstructions. If you've reached the edge of the circle you'll usually see the filter thread on the front obstructing the view and it's time to lower the front until you can see all the way through. Looks like you need a piece of cardboard under the bellows to help it a little.

[Michael Kadillak]

My only advice would be to put a 24" black towel into the recess of the rear standard and the base of the Wisner camera to block light coming into the ground glass area when you are composing and/or focusing. Leave the loup home and just concentrate on the ground glass. With 11x14 you have 154 square inches of ground glass and you will go buggy trying to check it with a micro objective. When you eliminate as much extraneous light coming into your viewing area all of a sudden you can step back from the ground glass and look at the corners and the composition and know when it is right. Plus getting used to this way of working makes it much easier to inspect for overall focus when you need to stop down to bring things into optimal focus. Michael Smith and Sandy King demonstrated the merits of this technique first hand and it really works. From my point of view a loup with ULF is like shoveling snow with a garden trowel. You can do it but it will consume a heck of a lot of your time unnecessarily. Lastly, I cannot overemphasize doing your best to keep your loaded holders from direct sunlight particularly ar the flap end. Nothing will jar your mother's preserves better than edge leaks into your costly image area. I got out the masking tape and put a thin coat of black matt spray paint in both corners of all of my ULF holders specifically to prevent extraneous light from entering this area and reflecting into the image area.

Sounds like you are hooked and having a great time.

Cheers!

[alec4444]

Ok, well today was day 2 of shooting, and while I don't have the second set developed yet I do know my problem previously was bellows. I went back to the site of the building this AM and used the loops on the bellows to get them out of the way. With the needed amount of rise I did run out of image circle. This was a bit more obvious this time because I had a very slight "swoop" shape (about 3/4 of an inch) at the top of the ground glass, and tugging at the bellows did not make it go away.

As far as the shot goes, that's not a horrible thing because the foreground wasn't that interesting anyway and the shot will probably look fine if cropped. In general, however, this isn't going to cut it...I need a 360mm lens with a bigger image circle. Any suggestions?

Thanks!
--A