I was introduced to this site by Stephan Dietrtich when I was looking for Wollensak Verito examples.  Wow!  Finally found a site that reflects my interest. By way of introduction, I'm a computer architect working at nothing really important. 'Nuff said about that. I started off in the music biz as a composer. Got tired of that. Then I found film photography with LF equipment. Much more interesting and rewarding. Although I have sharp lenses in the kit, I've found that the classic lenses work better for me here in the east coast rain forest. Especially in winter when there's less clutter. The challenge of east coast landscape photography is that there's just so much stuff in the way. Grand west-coast visions just aren't available here. Yes, we have mountains (what the west-coasters call foothills), but you need to be in a balloon or a cherry-picker to see them through the brush. Thus, I'm left with pointing into the forest instead of around it and that's where the classic lenses shine. IN the forest, it's all about shape and pattern -- seeing the forest instead of all those trees. Sure, you can get the effect by shaking the camera or just blurring things with bad focus, but it's not the same. Classic lenses, especially portrait lenses, allow one to narrow down the plane of sharp focus just so much better and with more control. Within that plane, petzval formulas will even allow selective focus on the same plane. And, that's just what's needed in the forest. 

Add to that the glow that can be obtained with an old rapid-rectilinear shot wide open, or the graphics effect that happen with a single meniscus and on and on, and the possibilities sometimes become overwhelming. 

And so, I offer some efforts that show where I am in the journey. What I love about this site is that I no longer need to feel cowed by what the 'contemporary' world is doing. Very gratifying to find wide-open to be a more interesting direction.

George

This is in Watchung Reservation, NJ in March 2008. I used a Voigtlander Heliar 300mm at around f/6 with the focus on the lit up tree. It was evening and the sun was just above the horizion.

Light Source

This is a FP4-Xtol test shot w/the 2 grps of the TH projection lens.   In the interest of avoiding Lung damage/Renal failure and everything else that goes w/some of these chemicals, my return to the dev my own stuff is going to have to be w/Xtol.  I figure if Citric Acid is going to Jack me up, then I might as well quit. 

This test shot and probably a bunch more I need to do on the way is practice to get out the cobwebs/rust from my agitation technique and working my way back to nice even development. 

This is a test, but the focus is on the money, and for the central SM, I uploaded this to give an idea of what this lens does via a big 4x5 neg ala FP4 as opposed to the Fuji version of the same SM below.  Soft but smooth, kind of a combo between the AeroEktar and the TR, and minus the color of the previous Fuji shot maybe this unmasks more of the lens nuance.

The shots that I've sent Alan Wedertz for printing to the Fomabron Velvet 123, and Adox MCC III were on FP4 shot w/the TR 10 inch and dependent on the result of those shots, I may do some more shots(do they still call 'em still lifes?) w/the 2 frnt grps of the Cooke when this paper goes into production.

     I haven't been able to let go of this lens, and will keep on using it for playing around different developers and papers.   This is a slightly different shot of a glass heart, and taken on Fuji instant film, which gives a monochrome look with this kind of subject matter.    Fuji FP-100C45 is dynamite in giving you either a preview of what you'll get w/other film or as the final medium for your image.

     I've started back dev my own film on a part time basis since I'll probably always have a sensitivity to most dev chemicals.   I've ended my Ansco 130 experiments when this developer started making me sick, and am trying to duplicate the look of this shot w/Xtol which doesn't seem to mess up my system.   The irony of using the FP-100C45 is that I find myself trying to duplicate the look I get w/the Fuji with whatever film I use as the final medium as opposed to when I used Polaroids which were never as good as the same shot taken w/a film like FP4.

    This lens configuration is the star of the show, and this shot indicates exactly what I was seeing through the viewfinder when I took this interation of this shot.  

These tests were shot w/my last lens acquisition, the mighty F1.5, 5 inch Taylor-Hobson Projection lens.   Weighing approx. 8-9 pounds, it would not fit on my SpeedGraphic, but thankfully the 2 front groups from the lens does.   My very crude calculations put the 2 front groups at a FL of 8-9 inches and approx. F2. 

I'm entering a different phase of my photographic life, I've got enough lenses to last the rest of my life, and I want to explore those lenses in depth.   Thankfully Jim Galli is around and I can still enjoy the results of his tests, but I want to shoot more and air all these lenses out.

I smoked for 26yrs. and became sensitive to darkroom chemicals during that same period, and doctors had me sware off cigarettes and the darkroom, and so I got into the habit of taking my film to the lab.  Nowadays, an 8x10 sheet of Ilford FP4-HP5 was running me $10.00 a sheet to process and this was becoming intolerable, and having all these tests to do, I had to figure another way to go.

I didn't have to figure long, Jim Galli suggested I shoot some paper positives, and at the same time I came across Efke Direct Positive paper and Daniel Buck's shots with the Efke paper, and all of the above factors spurred me on to decide to experiment w/the Efke paper and processing it myself.   I figured this would also get me some practice for developing my own film, and later contact printing my Centennial POP. 

Daniel Bucks great stuff brought up the issue of contrast, so I bought some Rollei Low Contrast dev. from Freestyle, and Ansco/Formulary 130 dev. from Formulary.  After cutting down the paper(which is slightly too wide and too long for both my 4x5 and 8x10 filmholders), I loaded up some 4x5 and shot a 4 expsure test.  I'm not going to bother testing this paper w/the Ansco/Formulary 130.

Regarding the tests, metering my subject matter gave me a reading of F2@8 seconds.  I went ahead and bracketed, shooting at F2 with 4 exposures at 4,8,16, and 30 seconds.   Bellows extension and reciprocity factors sucked up quite a bit of exposure since it was the 30 second exp. gave me the image I wanted.  I then set up the Rollei dev., diluting to the working solution per the instructions on the bottle and put the working solution in Air-Evac bottles, since the dev. is oxygen sensitive.  I set up the dev., a tray of tapwater, fixer, and Hypo.

Development was for 6 minutes @75 degrees and a 30 second agitation for the first shot which was way underexposed, and I shortened the dev. time to 5 minutes for the shot you see here.   After the dev. time was up, I dunked the paper in water, then for 2 minutes in the fixer, and then for a minute or 2 in my hypo then washed the print.

In terms of the issue of contrast, you have to make up your own mind after you view the print, this j-peg pretty much duplicates the general look of the print although the print is much more lustrous and detailed.  It also possible because of the nature of the lighting and the subject matter that the contrast is less apparent than what really is there.  But just on feel, it looks good to me, and I think you'll be able to play with dev. time and dilution to tame any contrast issues w/this paper.  You guys are going to have to tell me what you think.

I've included an example of the same shot done w/Fujifilm FP-100C45 instant film which is the top shot,  the Efke shot is at the bottom.   I love this paper and it very much reminds me of Ilford FP4 even though it isn't an exact duplication of a print where the subject matter was originally shot on FP4.  It does however have the 'classic feel' that I like from FP4 and HP5.

Well, there you go.

Take care 

Yes!  Well let him out!  If your grandparents were typical US kids they played this joke on their grocer.  It's one of those old jokes that has become like urban legend. 

This can has sat atop this workbench since our grandparents were kids.  No one has disturbed the contents of this old mill building since perhaps 1936.  I used my sweet little Cooke 8 1/2" on full plate size for this.