The other day I got to wondering if I could make panoramic images by using my 90 mm Super Angulon f8 on my 8x10 and getting a 4” x 9” picture. The image circle is listed at 216 mm ( I hoped to squeak out a smidge more) and it was one of those things that sounded like a good idea at the time.

About everything went wrong that could.

I made a ½ dark slide so I could make two images on 8x10 but then found when I put that lens on an 8x10 camera, the bellows were completely compressed, so I had no rise. I would have to waste a full sheet of film.

I planed on creating a gradient mask in Photoshop and printing it on transparent material with an ink jet printer to use instead of a center filter when contact printing. I then found out that transparent sheets for ink jet printers sell for almost as much as film and are 50 to a box!

Then I put a fairly thick name brand screw on red filter on the front of the lens and made the mistake of allowing the sun’s disk filtered through heavy overcast to be in the edge of scene.

When I processed the negative I had a circular band of flair about ¾” wide from about the 1:00 to the 4:00 position toward the edge of the negative on the opposite side of the sun’s disk.

It started close enough to the center of the negative that it would have been on a 4x5. I have used this lens many times and never had the problem before.

I decided that this must have been caused by the front and rear surface of the filter?

I then thought that had I anticipated this, I should have put the filter on the back of the lens.

Now, Bob Solomon says in the prior post, never put the filter on the back of the lens. Could this be the one exception, or do I have my problem misdiagnosed completely?