The Temptation of Whole Plate

[Sandeha]

I have to say that even with limited movements, a traditional whole plate camera is a big lump of fun. Looking at that big view screen and focusing hardly needing a loup, it's relatively easy to compose. I am, though, going to have to improve my hit rate ... this was #3 out of four sheets I loaded. Scan of contact print.

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a119/Sandeha/contact_prints/080903_np22_02.jpg

Houghton Triple Victo (circa 1900) with Caltar II-E 210mm 6.8 lens. Wephota NP22, ISO 100. F64, /4. Slight rear tilt and swing. Dev'd in Rodinal.

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a119/Sandeha/restoration/th_IMGP3960_copy.jpg (http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a119/Sandeha/restoration/IMGP3960_copy.jpg)

The big surprise was being able to use the Caltar and that it covers with half an inch to spare at f22. That's from the data spec for the lens which is said to cover up to 5x7 ... I guess no one at Rodenstock thought whole plate would be of interest. This is one versatile little triplet.

Here's a detail: neg scanned at 1200 - the same res I use for 6x6.

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a119/Sandeha/contact_prints/0070908_np22_detail.jpg

Some info in the restoration here ... http://www.sandehalynch.com/restoration.htm

[Antanas-Lukosevicius]

Looks great, like it, post some more.
Nearly up and running with my Gandolfi WP,
let the WP renaissance continue..........

A

[Ash]

Nice shot there.

I'm gagging for a WP camera now .... I don't even make enough use of my 4x5 :(

[Rob_5419]

Sandeha,

Great first scanned image, but why the modern lens at f64 whilst shuttered in a Copal for a whole plate camera?:eek:

Not sure about the film characteristics since I don't know anything about the film, other than that it's available. It don't look like FP4+ -
how does it compare to other FP4+ negatives of yours when developed in Rodinal?

Be careful you don't start all those 8x10 boys thinking that WP photographers are a happy rennaissance bunch hanging out in cemeteries..

By the way - what scanner are using?

[Sandeha]

Rob, I'd say it's more like Efke than FP4+, but more like FP4+ than TMax. I've no complaints about the film. The church is on the hill right above me, so it's been a frequent test target. I have an Epson 3200.

Why f64? Just out of curiosity ... f32 would have been fine.

[Rob_5419]

That's really good news then. When my FP4+ runs out, I'll have to order some. Glad to hear it's like a trad film.

When you scan a whole plate negative with an Epson flatbed, how do you get your negative to stay flat? Do you have a special holder to get the focus position right?

I'm thinking about an Epson 4490 or a v750. Until then, I won't be doing any scanning...

[Sandeha]

Rob, I can't recommend on scanners, except to say that mine is now four years old and may need to be replaced sometime.

I made a cut-out from some black card approx the same height as the Epson holder, but of course with WP on the 3200 I have to Preview once, and then scan two halves and stitch'em.

[Ash]

Sandeha, I have the same problem with the Epson for 4x5, it is made for 35mm and slides, so scanning 6x6 ends up 6x5 cropped... and 4x5 requires stitching. It's a nightmare!

[Rob_5419]

I made a cut-out from some black card approx the same height as the Epson holder, but of course with WP on the 3200 I have to Preview once, and then scan two halves and stitch'em.

Don't get it. Maybe because I don't have a scanner.

Why can't you just scan in one pass? Surely the flat bed is an A4 size?

[Sandeha]

Yup, but the light source in the lid is only wide enough for 4"x5" ... ie. 11" long, but only 4.5" wide.

If I scan 5x7, it comes out like 4.5x7 ... so it's a crop, or two passes.

[Rob_5419]

Ok. Pardon my ignorance.

I've tried to read it up:

http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/consumer/consDetail.jsp?oid=27766185

If the light source is in the lid, then the image is scanned with the light above it.

What use is the rest of the A4 area in the scanner? Document scanning/fax type scans?

If the 4x5 light source is too narrow, what if you invert your 5000K lightbox on top of the scanner to illuminate the whole field. Would that work?

Granted, it's not a very elegant solution.

[Sandeha]

If the 4x5 light source is too narrow, what if you invert your 5000K lightbox on top of the scanner to illuminate the whole field. Would that work?

In principle, but none too efficient on account of the low power of the light source. But anyway, the lids have grown. The Epson 4990 has an 8x10 light in the lid - hence the wish to upgrade.

[Rob_5419]

Thanks Sandeha.

I don't think I understand scanners at all.

Maybe I need to go to my local electronics store and get a demo. Is Jessops competent enough even for that, or would I be better off at Dixons or Currys?

The mind boggles. Suddenly I might have to start shopping in places with technocrats.

[Ash]

Rob, avoid Jessops at all cost.

I was looking around the local one trying to kill some time. A lady picks up two inkjet packs from the display wall "Should I buy this Epson one? Or this one? Which is better can you help??" ...a short silence... the clerk says"uhhhh....well... I get all my printing done in-store, so I dunno"...... so the lady goes with the epson carts.


That shop has been a joke for years.



For help understanding scanners, and for a working demo I'd recommend a big computer store that has the stuff on display, PC World perhaps?

[Rob_5419]

I know it's not good, but that's because the young staff are just fresh out of their GCSE year, being paid peanuts?

The last time I was there looking for a step up filter thread, the shop was crowded with loads of digitypes. I asked for a 49mm filter step up ring to a 52mm step-up ring. Sales guy asks me what camera it's for. I asked him why does it matter - he says, because Sony only make step-up rings for their own cameras.

Don't think the guy had a clue, but as he didn't look mean and cynical, I smiled at him and wished him a good day.

Poor pawn in Britain's bad old blue store.