post your trees!

[Corran]

Thanks Ned, Pali, and chassis (edit: and Dennis! )! Yes, it's fantastic when you see a composition that's perfect for the format you are carrying - especially when it's an odd size. As soon as I saw the reflection in the pool I knew how I wanted to shoot this, and due to rain and varying water levels at that river it is not likely to be just like that again.

I have some 20x24 paper in the darkroom - I can cut it in half to 10x24 and make some contact prints. Or maybe chop my 16x20 paper dead even to size and then face mount it...anyway, this week I'll order some of the P99 acrylic I use on my Cezanne to make both a scanning hold-down plate and a contact printing apparatus (P99 is an ANR plexi).

BTW, here is a photo of me starting to set up this shot, by my friend Dominick who was with me. Obviously I hadn't put the camera vertical yet but I was on that hill figuring out my placement.

[bill2424]

4x5 T-Max 100

[chassis]

4x5 T-Max 100

Well done Bill. Nice vision and execution with TMX. Great film.

[bill2424]

Thank you

[tennjed]

Near Peru, Illinois. Linhof Master technica, 120mm 5.6 Rodenstock, HP5. I introduced myself a couple days ago. This is around my fourth or fifth LF negative, so I welcome criticism. I referee high school football (American) so I can take even harsh criticism of my work........"You can insult the call all you want, coach; but if it gets personal, you're going to be eating dinner with your wife this evening."

[callmebrick]

Near Peru, Illinois. Linhof Master technica, 120mm 5.6 Rodenstock, HP5. I introduced myself a couple days ago. This is around my fourth or fifth LF negative, so I welcome criticism. I referee high school football (American) so I can take even harsh criticism of my work........"You can insult the call all you want, coach; but if it gets personal, you're going to be eating dinner with your wife this evening."

It looks like there are some faint vertical streaks in the center. Is it lens flare/reflection or something on the negative itself? It looks like some of mine when I scan them before they are completely dry.

[tennjed]

Thanks for that. It is a distinct possibility, and one that I have not considered before, that I have not let negatives dry long enough. I was pretty excited to get this one scanned, and dried it per my usual for 35mm negatives. Is there a minimum for how long LF negatives should be left to dry? Scanner was Epson V800 and has not shown a banding or streaking problem when used with 35mm. Thanks for the comment. The shot was a bit "contre jour" as the morning sun is probably about 30 to 40 degrees left of image.

[otto.f]

My first photo with my new Chamonix 45F-2, happy with it!:

http://lotwouda.zenfolio.com/p125475...e547#h9471e547

[paulbarden]

Thanks for that. It is a distinct possibility, and one that I have not considered before, that I have not let negatives dry long enough. I was pretty excited to get this one scanned, and dried it per my usual for 35mm negatives. Is there a minimum for how long LF negatives should be left to dry? Scanner was Epson V800 and has not shown a banding or streaking problem when used with 35mm. Thanks for the comment. The shot was a bit "contre jour" as the morning sun is probably about 30 to 40 degrees left of image.

The Epson flatbed scanners have a well documented problem with 'banding" that is especially noticeable with 120 roll format negs. Take a look at this article. Epson has acknowledged the problem is a design flaw in the device and has issued replacement neg holders for these scanners which eliminate the problem. (Yes, I requested the modified holder and can verify that it addresses the problem) If you contact Epson and talk to someone there about your problem, they will likely send you a replacement neg holder for your scanner.

[tennjed]

I did go check out the thread on Epson scanners/holders. It looks like it was written in 2015. My scanner was purchased this year and, I believe, came with the improved holders. Oddly enough, I had to purchase a set of the old holders because the new ones feature a clear plastic bed that is supposed to hold the film flat. It does hold the film flat; but , in my experience, any convenience provided by this new feature is negated by the fact that the clear plastic functions as a horrible dust trap. Frustrating. I'm going to give a go to the idea of allowing my negatives to dry longer.