sharp negative problems with Linhof Kardan Color 45S

[Terence Falk]

I have been exclusively using a Linhof Karden Color 45S I purchased in 1976 and have routinely gotten extremely sharp results- until about a year or so ago that is, when I noticed the negs looked soft. When I look at older negs I am positive there is more resolution. Same lens, same developer, same everthing. Not all of my negs are soft, but it does reoccur. I am currently doing tests, shooting one scene with every holder and then printing them ( the holders are all numbered and then the number is put into the test scene I am shooting so I can immediately see which holder shot which negative). I think either the camera, after 30+ years, is out of whack or the holders or both. I also bought some Toyo holders and are doing comparisons with the liscos I have been using. Besides the holders, my other theories as to why this is happening are: a slight shifting of the rear standard when putting the holder in, possible diffraction by using the highest f/stop , possible focus shift when stopping down ( although that doesn't seem to be an issue with the older work) or a combination of these things. There is no fresnel at the ground glass- it is original one and it has never been changed, never been loose. Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Sorry for initially putting this inquiry into the thread on the Chamoix; I haven't done this in a while!

[Bill_1856]

Probably oil from the aperture and/or shutter blades have evaporated and coated the inner surfaces of your lens elements.

[Terence Falk]

thats an interesting thought, but some negs are very sharp and others are not. I would think that if the elements were dirty, all of the negs would be out.

[Jack Dahlgren]

Since it is only some negatives, developer or film would seem to be ruled out. But the other sources you mentioned could be it, not to mention your tripod/head, aging eyes etc.

[Ivan J. Eberle]

Shortly after I got into LF I noticed that absent the built-in dioptric adjustments of my DSLRs (which adjustments are more frequent and have steadily become more critical over time), the need for reading glasses to get under the darkcloth and to get my face close enough to the GG to focus adequately. A loupe is pretty much now essential gear for fine focus, at age 50. Neither would have been necessary back in the day, had I gotten into LF back in 1976 when I was 16, of that I am fairly certain.


But who knows-- maybe your vision is still 20/20 or better even close up.

Since it's a monorail, I'll ask the obvious: does the rear standard lock still down tight when focusing? If it can be bumped while inserting a film holder, that might be enough. Or perhaps your tripod is worn out or needs adjustment. You don't mention what emulsion. Is it one that the substrate has been upgraded a slightly more diffuse one? Did the film sit around since 1976, too, or are you using fresh? Did it go through TSA screening scanners, or did it get Xray'd in in your checked bags?

[ic-racer]

possible diffraction by using the highest f/stop , !

That will do it. But some like this effect. (think Joel Meyerowitz).

[Terence Falk]

I have been shooting exclusively with Tri-x for thirty years. I have been wondering if since they have changed Tri-x, if that would account for a softer looking image.I had no idea that the substrate was now more diffuse. It doesn't surprise me that Kodak would screw up something that works. The work never goes through x-ray, its always fresh film ( I can't imagine using film that was made in 1976 now in 2010). The loupe is a very good quality Schneider with adjustable focusing; I carefully adjust it and then tape it down to that setting so it doesn't creep. I do wear glasses, so i am very aware that the loupe needs to be adjusted.
I agree that the fact that its a monorail that the rear standard could be creeping; I have started to be more aware of that and now I lock it down and then do the fine focusing with the front standard. Another idea is to have Marflex overhaul the camera and maybe they can restore the rear standard focusing parts.

[rdenney]

I have been shooting exclusively with Tri-x for thirty years. I have been wondering if since they have changed Tri-x, if that would account for a softer looking image.I had no idea that the substrate was now more diffuse. It doesn't surprise me that Kodak would screw up something that works. The work never goes through x-ray, its always fresh film ( I can't imagine using film that was made in 1976 now in 2010). The loupe is a very good quality Schneider with adjustable focusing; I carefully adjust it and then tape it down to that setting so it doesn't creep. I do wear glasses, so i am very aware that the loupe needs to be adjusted.
I agree that the fact that its a monorail that the rear standard could be creeping; I have started to be more aware of that and now I lock it down and then do the fine focusing with the front standard. Another idea is to have Marflex overhaul the camera and maybe they can restore the rear standard focusing parts.

If it is oil that has evaporated onto the lenses, then it should only affect the inner surfaces of each cell. You can clean that yourself.

You can also measure the distance between the standards after wiggling, using a cheap dial caliper. That is accurate enough to determine if the standard can wander during film loading.

There is a possibility that there has been wear in the surface against which the film holder rests. The GG holder should rest on the same surface, but it might not, and you should be able to check that by inspection.

Finally, I would be sure to use the loupe at the point where you are checking focus on your negatives. If you focus in the middle but you are seeing softness at top or bottom (or on one side), then your back and lens standards may no longer be parallel. But even with that problem, it should still be sharp at the spot where you focused with a loupe. The only way that focus at that point can be off is if:

1. The standard moves when loading film.

2. The holder doesn't place the film on the same plane as the ground glass.

You can also make a photograph looking down the length of a ruler to check to make sure it is focusing on what you think it's focusing on. Use a wider aperture. That will also identify whether it is a focus problem or some other cause of softness.

Rick "always preferring to do his own tests" Denney

[Terence Falk]

rick-
thanks for the great ideas; I have shot the ruler test the other day and will process it soon. I agree with your thoughts on this; as far as the wear on the camera back altering the focal plane, I did check that early on, and all I can see is a tiny amount of paint loss where the film holders have been scraping in and out over the years. It seems so microscopic I cant believe that would make the difference- maybe it does. This camera has operated so perfectly for so many years even the paint has a hard time coming off where its being worn!
I also wonder if I am pressing the loupe up against the ground glass while focusing which makes the whole camera "lean" forward ever so slightly. I focus at that point and then when I insert the holder the camera is in its "normal" position. I'm pretty careful about everything but may be doing this without realizing it.

[Ivan J. Eberle]

One lens or is it happening across several? Did you perhaps take a lens apart and drop a shim before reassembly without realizing it?

[Terence Falk]

It appears to happen regardless of the lens I am using. I have a 120 schneider, a 150 rodenstock, and a 210 schneider. I have taken them off their boards from time to time to use the board for a rented lens ( that was commercial work and the focus results were fine with the rentals) but I never saw any shims ever. I am pretty careful about putting the lenses on, etc.
Once I print the recent test of the same shot from each holder I think I should get a better idea of what to pursue next. As I previously mentioned, I do see that the rear standard is harder to lock down than it was in the past. The only design flaw I have experienced with the Linhof is that the tightening knob on the back standard can also shift the standard at the same time as locks it down. I think over time its gotten worn and so it creeps even easier. This is why I think if I change my habit of focusing with the rear standard (just lock it down as soon as possible) and then focus in front, it may help. I wonder if Marflex has the inner working parts to the tightening assembly of the rear standard? I will look into that.