Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/03/24

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] veiling flare on 50/2
From: Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca>
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 18:08:29 -0800
References: <625D48C6.58DFBD6F.0000E41E@aol.com> <000701c2f260$2bc1d260$9cad5018@gv.shawcable.net> <3E7FA9AD.1FF28185@rabinergroup.com>

Mark Rabiner asked:
> >> Ted! I've seen you with nothing but a Noctilux (and clothes) did you
use
> JUST the Noct for these 207 rolls or a mix of lenses?<<<

Hi Mark,
No I used  the Noctilux, 35 Summilux, 21 CV f.4.0 and the 90 Summicron f
2.0, all on M7's. The Tri-x was rated at 800 and souped in XTOL 1:1 @ 75 for
8 mins. Agitation the first 30 seconds and three inversions each 30 seconds
after until completed time.

Because I normally shoot both R8 and M7's at the same time and for whatever
reason I didn't and used M only.  I feel by looking at the negs quickly,
that is until I see the contacts, suspect many "of what I was motivated by"
situations will be lost due to the M only camera and the 90. It just didn't
reach in for those intimate moments I'd have hopefully captured with the R8
and a 100 or 180mm lens.

Don't ask why, as I really don't have a common sense answer that I changed
my shooting style. Hopefully my stepping forward and closer to the subject I
may have saved the moment as seen. However, I doubt it! :-( Damn  and I have
no logical common sense experienced reason why I didn't work the 4 cameras
each time. Oh well, editing will tell the truth.

ted

Samples from the Women in Medicine project:
http://www.sandycarterphotography.com/WIMcollagePage.htm




- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from P2CON@aol.com (Re: [Leica] veiling flare on 50/2)
Message from Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca> (Re: [Leica] veiling flare on 50/2)
Message from Mark Rabiner <mark@rabinergroup.com> (Re: [Leica] veiling flare on 50/2)