I've been looking through my viewfinder at different subject matter w/this lens since I bought and restored it, a restoration which took about 7 months.  The Ser. III is the softest lens I've ever had on a camera, when looking at something illuminated by bright light, and pointing it in certain directions, I wasn't able to make out anything I was looking at but a garish/blown up/blown out mess.    There are lighting scenarios where using this lens isn't going to work, and the challenge of using this lens is matching a lighting scheme to this lens where the lens can perform its best.

    Over the course of having the lens, I started playing around w/lighting schemes and I gradually started to think of  subdued light as the way forward for me and this lens, and while juggling around low light schemes and checking 'em out w/this lens on my Toyo, l began to see whiffs of this lens potential. 

    The Ser. III is the most extreme example of how lenses like these are really 2 lenses, they're one type of lens giving a soft dreamy rendering w/a lot of pop around the highlights in scenes w/very bright lighting, they become a more subtle type of lens capable of more nuance in more subdued lighting situations w/more subdued highlights.   

     The lens is very difficult to focus under the best of circumstances, and you really have to fish for where the focus is.    Since the lens is so soft you can be looking through the groundglass and not realize you've passed by that 'sweet spot' where there's a sharp image overlaid w/a soft one.  The plane of focus is ever so thin, as it was on this shot, where I'm at 4 feet away from the Subject Matter w/a 16 inch lens.

     I shot this w/some very old Polaroid 804(8x10 instant) using natural light and a single modeling light from one of my strobes.  I went through about 7-8 Polaroids, until coming onto the lighting scheme you see here.  Shutter time for this shot  was 'one thousand one, one thousand two, and then since the light  coming through the windows wouldn't wait, I immediately shot a sheet of both FP4 and Porta 160 color to see what that would look like.

    What I believe you can see in this image is the sharp image overlaid with a soft one, particularly on camera right as you look at the edge of the glass globe, either that or I'm seeing things.  You tell me.

    Focusing this damn thing for the better part of 15 minutes straight before taking this shot gave me a headache, but I think I learned some things about the lens. 

A teaser.

I was BUSY this weekend and you get a 2 fer!  I promised a page of comparison shots with the NEW2ME Hermagis Eidoscop 150mm on 4X5.  It is here:

http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/150Eidy/150Eidoscop.html

But wait!  There's more!  If you push the button NOW I'll include an extra post about a Darlot 12" Landscape lens for FREE!

http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/150Eidy/12inchDarlotLandscape.html

Hurry! because this offer won't last forever   :cool:

Love to hear your thoughts as always!

Needless to say I am smitten with a new lens.  Hermagis Eidoscop 150mm and 4X5 Ektapan.  The Eidoscop shares it's design lineage with the Nicola Perscheid and the Pinkham Visual Quality series IV lenses.   The French re-interpret the contrast to their liking and I must say, I love the Eidoscop lenses.  The Ektapan was 1977 film with plenty of film base plus fog present.  It was nice to play in 4X5 for a change.  What a lens!  This was done 1 stop in from wide open, f6.3

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 :~'))

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.

    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.

oil decanters #1

     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