When it rains it pours.  There's been some great posts.  Nelson,  Sweet!  I've got this 150mm Hermagis Eidoscop that needs a Razzle.  Ah well, other priorities will prevail.  Here are a couple of grab shots from this weekend.  I needed two sheets to round up a JOBO 3005 tank and so did these.  They're an interesting study side by side.  First is the TRM @ f6.8, and second is the same at f45 1/2

The first was 7 seconds @ f6.8 and the second was 14 minutes f45 1/2.  Negs are identical which says a lot for the Pcatechol.  This lens is at it's best with some piece of the subject in sharp focus and then the rest left to itself.  I like 'em both.  Not bad for filler :~'))

    Good Evening folks

I'll preface this w/saying that Jim Galli's shot represents how glass is perfect for these kinds of lenses. 

I'm starting a multi-faceted project where I'm going to use either the Taylor-Hobson lens grps or my Jim Galli modified 10 inch Turner Reich to shot 5 images for a new gallery on my personal site worktitled 'shapes'.   I'm goint to shoot those 5 images on FP4, and I'm going to have Master Printer Alan Wedertz print the 5 images on both Fomabron Velvet 123, and Adox MCC 111 paper.   The Fomabron paper Velvet 123 Adox MCC 111 are equivalent to the old Agfa MCC 118 and MCC 111 respectively.  Eric Joseph of Freestyle was kind enough to give me these papers, and having Alan Wedertz using his Master Printing ability to do these tests will do these tests Justice.

If all goes right Alan will write about his printing this paper and also give his observations.   I'll then either use the scans of the negs or the scans of the prints to create a new gallery on my personal website.   I'll then use those same negs to start my experiments w/Centennial POP, which I've put off for too long.

When Polaroid went 'belly up', it was right on time for me to acquire some Fuji instant film, which despite being color is perfect for me proofing my lighting, and despite being color gives me a very good feel for my lighting.   I give great compliments to Craig Nelson who sold me this film, it's as good as new, for a lot less money and Craig is an honorable guy.

The 2 front grps of the Taylor-Hobson lens is an interesting configuration that I'm going to experiment after this w/portraiture, and I'll be continuing on w/this project w/the final images shot on my 10 inch Turner Reich which was modified by Jim Galli.

The top shot which is from the Taylor Hobson and was shot at approx. F2, shot on the bulb setting(shutter time was 'one thousand and one'), I use bulb so I don't blow any film like I have been known to do using 'T' where I'll look at the SM and then load up some film while I forget to close down the lens.   I didn't correct correct or do anthing to the brightness of these two shots.

The bottom shot is the Turner Reich.   What can I say, in terms of sharpness or smoothness, these kinds of descriptors don't really pin this lens down.  It doesn't really matter, this lens has a quality that is just so elegant.  It does remind me so much of the Pinkhams when you stop them down, and I have to keep reminding myself of why that is, which is partly because it's @ F6.8 wideopen.

I plan to complete this project, and then go on to testing my Gundlach Achromatic Meniscus when I agree w/Jim is very similar in look to the Pinkham Synthetic, and then the VQ IV, and lastly the Pinkham SA Double Ser III, No III.

Made with unmodified but damaged Turner Reich 12 1/4" f7 lens wide open.  On one of the groups there is a bizarre pattern in the cement very much like the intricate swirls of a finger print and about that fine.  It covers the entire optic and has a marvelous softening effect.  When you stop down it gets blurrier....but with increased depth of field.  A very weird lens that I need to PLAY with much more.

        First off, I did not Photoshop this together.  It's a straight film shot.  This is a 2 dollar plastic magnifier sitting over a pair of Ray-Bans, sitting on brushed Aluminum.   You can get the same effect of a light pattern if you get a magnifier and look at it at an extreme angle which should hopefully convince everybody that I didn't do this in Photoshop.

        I started playing around with this magnifier, proping it up by putting objects under it which produced some interesting light patterns, which to the naked eye were much more defined than you see here as the Turner Reich renders these light patterns in a much softer way. 

        Getting the magnifer at a certain angle to the light,  and looking through the Turner Reich, the light pattern looked like something mystical to me and I thought of what I read about 'Indra's Net', thus the name of the shot.  I wanted to inject the human element into the idea, so I thought of glasses which is what folks use to examine things.   I wasn't about to putting reading glasses under the magnifier to prop it up, so I used my daughter's Ray-Bans.

        The illusion of the 'road of light' trailing off into the background under the glasses was a surprise to me because the glasses are under the magnifier, and the light pattern is along the fresnel pattern of the magnifier which sits over the glasses, so it's the exact opposite of what it looks like.   The glasses have a certain texture because they're sitting under the magnifier.

        I didn't know what the hell to use for an exposure, so I used 'one thousand one, one thousand two, and fired the shutter.   The copy of this image on my website looks different becuase I simply 'dragged and dropped' this smaller image onto a larger black background and left it at that.

I'm not uploading this to 'fish for compliments', but to serve up a better looking j-peg which'll give a better sense of what the Turner Reich can do.  Understand the tiff version of this shot looks several times as good as the J-peg, and the print looks a lot better than the tiff. 

After doing the shot which I originally uploaded here, I left the set-up in place, and put my camera up, and then decided to shoot some slightly different angles, and to shoot some versions w/Ilford FP4 which I'll get from the lab early next week.  If the FP4 serves up a quantum jump in transfering the values and nuances of the TR, then I'll try to upload those shots.  But bottom line, j-pegs just don't do justice to what this lens can do.  

I keep talking about this lens because of how good it is, and we're talking if memory serves me right about we're talking about $75.00 and change,  so it definitely re-affirms the great fun I've had, anybody can have, coming up with a lens like this, MADE BETTER by Jim Galli.  

I've spend some money on more famous lenses, don't regret it, and I'm happy I've got those lenses, and I know I'm preaching to the 'choir', but I gotta say, classic lenses are the best thing to ever happen to me as a photographer.  The best thing about it is the fact that how much the lens is worth, has absolutely NOTHING to do with what these lenses are capable of,  and this lens is capable of a lot. 

I want to thank you Jim, for what you did for me with this lens, and thank you for all your adventures, and experiments, which all of us should appreciate, particularly since you do all the work, while we get to sit back, and watch all these tests.