Toe speed of TMAX 400 (was fridge and heat problems)

"Frank Pittel" wrote in message
...
jjs wrote:

As far as I can tell from his previous posts scarpitti knows what the
exposure should
be without a meter ( he guesses ) and processes the film with the
published development
times. The contrast is controlled by the paper grade he prints on.

What you describe is the zone system which I and many others use and what
scarpitti claims
is a fraud.

In a strange way I sympathize with Scarpitti's philosophy, but certainly not
his anger and arrogance. There is a place for his kind of
exposure/development and it's worked well for a lot of miniature camera
people who embraced it as a stylistic technique (or lack thereof). It's just
too bad he's trying to make his mark as the worlds most obnoxious and
intollerant person.

I learned the Zone System from a great photographer in 1966, but my career
led me to photojournalism where for years I used mainly Tri-X and exposed
and composed to accomodate whatever processing it was to be subjected to
(Versamat was quite popular for some time. Horrors.) Later when I could do
my own processing (at a great paper, then a magazine), it was largely D-76
and Edwal FG7 with the film at 200 and 320 respectively, modestly
underdeveloped to hold the highlights. Now that I'm retired from that stuff,
I can go back with 4x5 and _really_ custom expose/develop. May I recommend
the book, "Way beyond Monochrome"? (Sorry, but I forgot who in this group
suggested it here first).

"Nick Zentena" wrote in message
...

When I got my first tank I figured I would get a processor but I got a
motorbase first. Turns out the motorbase does everything I need. I then
thought I'd get a processor if I ever wanted to do colour but now it seems
I
can live without. The only thing I miss is doing one roll of film or
maybe
a few sheets of 4x5. With my setup I'm using 640ml of chemicals or more so
one roll isn't that pratical.

I got this. Bad picture, but you get the idea. Someone earlier has mentioned
something very similar.
http://course1.winona.edu/jstafford/tray.gif

"Nick Zentena" wrote in message
...

When I got my first tank I figured I would get a processor but I got a
motorbase first. Turns out the motorbase does everything I need. I then
thought I'd get a processor if I ever wanted to do colour but now it seems
I
can live without. The only thing I miss is doing one roll of film or
maybe
a few sheets of 4x5. With my setup I'm using 640ml of chemicals or more so
one roll isn't that pratical.

I got this. Bad picture, but you get the idea. Someone earlier has mentioned
something very similar.
http://course1.winona.edu/jstafford/tray.gif

jjs wrote:


I got this. Bad picture, but you get the idea. Someone earlier has mentioned
something very similar.
http://course1.winona.edu/jstafford/tray.gif


Is that one of those sheet film holders? You just lift it up to agiate in
the tray? If the drums don't work for 5x7 I guess I could build one.

Thanks
Nick

jjs wrote:


I got this. Bad picture, but you get the idea. Someone earlier has mentioned
something very similar.
http://course1.winona.edu/jstafford/tray.gif


Is that one of those sheet film holders? You just lift it up to agiate in
the tray? If the drums don't work for 5x7 I guess I could build one.

Thanks
Nick

jjs wrote:
: "Frank Pittel" wrote in message
: ...
: jjs wrote:

: As far as I can tell from his previous posts scarpitti knows what the
: exposure should
: be without a meter ( he guesses ) and processes the film with the
: published development
: times. The contrast is controlled by the paper grade he prints on.
:
: What you describe is the zone system which I and many others use and what
: scarpitti claims
: is a fraud.

: In a strange way I sympathize with Scarpitti's philosophy, but certainly not
: his anger and arrogance. There is a place for his kind of
: exposure/development and it's worked well for a lot of miniature camera
: people who embraced it as a stylistic technique (or lack thereof). It's just
: too bad he's trying to make his mark as the worlds most obnoxious and
: intollerant person.

The closest I've come to the scarpitti method is with my Woca (it's a holga with a
glass lens) and then developed the film using N development. Since I rarely shot
anything smaller the 4x5 I find myself developing most roll film in diafine. Unlike you
I have no sympathy for scarpitti. Despite his claims of being the best at film
processing of those following this newsgroup and being a world class printer. The
images he put on his website were dreck. I have also found very little evidence of him
having anywhere near the ability or knowledge that he claims. There are people on this
newsgroup that when you read their posts you can tell that they have a vast amount of
knowledge. There are also people with links to websites with examples of their work and
it's clear that they are excellent photographers. Works like waffle boy and the rest of
the dreck that scarpitti has posted demonstrates that he has the abilities of a student
in an introductory to photography students. As a near professional student of the
college of DuPage here in the Chicago area most of the prints made by the intro
students create better prints then anything that scarpitti has posted.

: I learned the Zone System from a great photographer in 1966, but my career
: led me to photojournalism where for years I used mainly Tri-X and exposed
: and composed to accomodate whatever processing it was to be subjected to
: (Versamat was quite popular for some time. Horrors.) Later when I could do
: my own processing (at a great paper, then a magazine), it was largely D-76
: and Edwal FG7 with the film at 200 and 320 respectively, modestly
: underdeveloped to hold the highlights. Now that I'm retired from that stuff,
: I can go back with 4x5 and _really_ custom expose/develop. May I recommend
: the book, "Way beyond Monochrome"? (Sorry, but I forgot who in this group
: suggested it here first).


I'm sure I'm going to upset a number of people when I say that photojournalism is a
special case in photography. The need for quality exposure and processing is very low.
After all the image quality printed in most newspapers is very low as a result of the
printing process. The images in magazines is a bit better but with few exceptions
they're all in color. This is the reason the photojournalism was the first to go
digital. I am in no way diminishing the ability of the photojournalist as I believe they
have a very difficult job working in difficult situations. Partial proof of this is the
fact that now that you are a retired photojournalist you are taking the time to properly
expose the film and you take the time to develop the film in such a way to get the best
quality negative possible.

Over the last year you and I have strongly disagreed about things ranging from politics
to my feelings about TMX being the best film currently on the market ( I think you'll
agree that it would be silly for me to use TMX nearly exclusively if I didn't. ) In the
end I don't care what film or developer you use or how you develop your negatives.
What's important is that we get the results that we each want. I've taken a look at
"Way beyond Monochrome" in the past and for reasons I don't remember I didn't buy it. At
your recommendation I will get it the next time I see it for sale. I've even gotten the
"Film Developing Cookbook" and the book "Kodak Professional Black and White Films" that
scarpitti is always quoting. Although I have issues with material presented in both
books I found that I learned a lot from each of them.

I've also learned a lot from readin the posts here on this newsgroup. I doubt scarpitti
is willing or capable of learning anything from anywhere or anyone.
--




Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
-------------------

On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 11:25:36 -0500, "jjs" wrote:


"Nick Zentena" wrote in message
...

When I got my first tank I figured I would get a processor but I got a
motorbase first. Turns out the motorbase does everything I need. I then
thought I'd get a processor if I ever wanted to do colour but now it seems
I
can live without. The only thing I miss is doing one roll of film or
maybe
a few sheets of 4x5. With my setup I'm using 640ml of chemicals or more so
one roll isn't that pratical.

I got this. Bad picture, but you get the idea. Someone earlier has mentioned
something very similar.
http://course1.winona.edu/jstafford/tray.gif

I love it!

Well, I always did go soft in the head over gadgets.

Granted, it's nowhere as cheap or ubiquitous as Scotch tape, but if I
had one, I'd use it all the time.

Now we have two ways of processing 4 4X5s as an 8x10 sheet. There's
alaways the hanging holders in a tank or big tray (so you can watch
out for scratching of your film) to make a third.


Robert Vervoordt, MFA

"Nick Zentena" wrote in message
...
jjs wrote:


I got this. Bad picture, but you get the idea. Someone earlier has
mentioned
something very similar.
http://course1.winona.edu/jstafford/tray.gif

Is that one of those sheet film holders? You just lift it up to agiate
in
the tray? If the drums don't work for 5x7 I guess I could build one.

Yes. It holds 4 sheets. Pretty nifty, isn't it?

"Nick Zentena" wrote in message
...
jjs wrote:


I got this. Bad picture, but you get the idea. Someone earlier has
mentioned
something very similar.
http://course1.winona.edu/jstafford/tray.gif

Is that one of those sheet film holders? You just lift it up to agiate
in
the tray? If the drums don't work for 5x7 I guess I could build one.

Yes. It holds 4 sheets. Pretty nifty, isn't it?

"Frank Pittel" wrote in message
...

[...] Despite his claims of being the best at film
processing of those following this newsgroup and being a world class
printer.
[jjs]
[...]
: I learned the Zone System from a great photographer in 1966, but my
career
: led me to photojournalism where for years [...]

I'm sure I'm going to upset a number of people when I say that
photojournalism is a
special case in photography. The need for quality exposure and processing
is very low.
After all the image quality printed in most newspapers is very low as a
result of the
printing process.

As you wrote, I know you aren't disrespecting photojournalists. I appreciate
that, Frank. However you may have a common misperception. Photojournalists
are often limited to miniature formats, but the better ones nonetheless
pursue high quality. You see, they have their own competitions all the time
and for these events they have to enlarge their work often to float close to
16x20". You have to get into their world to appreciate what's going on
there. Just because what you see in the paper today is diminished by the
medium, it doesn't mean that the PJs are doing technically low-quality work.
As they say, you would have to be there, at the shows to know what I mean.

[...] Partial proof of this is the
fact that now that you are a retired photojournalist you are taking the
time to properly
expose the film and you take the time to develop the film in such a way to
get the best
quality negative possible.

But Frank! Today I don't shoot things that move as fast as rioters,
profootball players, or revolutionary gunmen!

I've also learned a lot from readin the posts here on this newsgroup. I
doubt scarpitti
is willing or capable of learning anything from anywhere or anyone.

Indeed. To lose humility and to stop learning is to die.