Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/05/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]How about /*expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights?*/ Slobodan Dimitrov wrote: > It's a way to figure out the optimal parameter between exposure and > development. > While originally intended for 4x5, it can be adapted for 120 and 35mm. > I looked for it on the net, and came up blank. I did find the Fred > Picker material, but that doesn't address roll film. > This was a staple of photo 100 classes. Unfortunately processing is > rarely thought at schools these days. > One has to know the materials. If not, then that gap in one's > knowledge is a limitation that becomes the plateau of one's capabilities. > > Slobodan Dimitrov > > > > > On May 8, 2007, at 11:11 AM, Luis Ripoll wrote: > >> Hi Slobodan, >> >> What do you mind for a "9 negative test"? >> >> Saludos cordiales >> Luis >> >> -----Mensaje original----- >> De: lug-bounces+luisripoll=telefonica.net@leica-users.org >> [mailto:lug-bounces+luisripoll=telefonica.net@leica-users.org] En >> nombre de >> slobodan dimitrov >> Enviado el: martes, 08 de mayo de 2007 3:37 >> Para: Leica Users Group >> Asunto: Re: [Leica] Experiences with 35/3.5 Elmar and... To Slobodan >> >> Actually, it's not the lens performance that is in question so much >> as the >> performance of the photographer. >> The issue in this image is that of exposure and processing. >> Luis, tell me, have you ever done a 9 negative test? >> >> S. Dimitrov >> >> >> On May 7, 2007, at 3:39 PM, Luis Ripoll wrote: >> >>> Hi Slobodan, >>> >>> Not at all, exceot if you want... it will be welcome as always, my own >>> critique is on the lens performance, I don't like very much this >>> picture, IMO the results of this strong backlight situation reminds me >>> the results I had with other older lenses, i.e. I think that actual >>> Summicron will performs better on such situation. >>> >>> Saludos cordiales >>> Luis >>> >>> -----Mensaje original----- >>> De: lug-bounces+luisripoll=telefonica.net@leica-users.org >>> [mailto:lug-bounces+luisripoll=telefonica.net@leica-users.org] En >>> nombre de Slobodan Dimitrov Enviado el: martes, 08 de mayo de 2007 >>> 0:33 >>> Para: Leica Users Group >>> Asunto: Re: [Leica] Experiences with 35/3.5 Elmar and... To Slobodan >>> >>> Are you asking for a critique? >>> >>> Slobodan Dimitrov >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On May 7, 2007, at 1:32 PM, Luis Ripoll wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Slobodan, >>>> >>>> I had a hard work editing this picture with the new Elmar-M, of >>>> course it is a very strong light situation, and I'm sure that it >>>> would be very difficult to manage with any other lens, but on a such >>>> crazy test... >>>> >>>> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3023665 >>>> >>>> Saludos cordiales >>>> Luis >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Mensaje original----- >>>> De: lug-bounces+luisripoll=telefonica.net@leica-users.org >>>> [mailto:lug-bounces+luisripoll=telefonica.net@leica-users.org] En >>>> nombre de slobodan dimitrov Enviado el: domingo, 06 de mayo de 2007 >>>> 23:44 >>>> Para: Leica Users Group >>>> Asunto: Re: [Leica] Experiences with 35/3.5 Elmar and 35/3.5 Summaron >>>> - NowSummitar >>>> >>>> I have a LTM Summitar from the early 1950's. While of a slightly >>>> lower contrast, what it gains in flare makes it virtually useless >>>> near the ocean. >>>> out here. >>>> Now the new Elmar-M, that's a different story. Less prone to flare, >>>> if at all, and smooth consistent luminosity under the worst possible >>>> light condition. >>>> >>>> S. Dimitrov >>>> >>>> >>>> On May 6, 2007, at 1:15 PM, Jeffery Smith wrote: >>>> >>>>> I mean pancake flat, like an Elmar. Daniel want to put it in his >>>>> trouser pocket. >>>>> >>>>> But now that you mention it, last week a guest speaker at the LHSA >>>>> spring shoot mentioned some excellent low contrast Leica lenses, but >>>>> I failed to write it down. Like you, I get terrible contrast >>>>> problems in the subtropical sun down here. The lens he mentioned was >>>>> probably single-coated, post-WWII. >>>>> It wasn't the Summarit or the Summaron (I have both of those). My >>>>> recollection (fuzzy) was that it was a Summitar. Anyone out there >>>>> use one of those these days? >>>>> >>>>> Jeffery Smith >>>>> New Orleans, LA >>>>> http://www.400tx.com >>>>> http://400tx.blogspot.com/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org >>>>> [mailto:lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of >>>>> slobodan dimitrov >>>>> Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 2:07 PM >>>>> To: Leica Users Group >>>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Experiences with 35/3.5 Elmar and 35/3.5 >>>>> Summaron >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In my lighting environment, the harbors of LA and LB, their contrast >>>>> suits me just fine. >>>>> >>>>> S. Dimitrov >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On May 6, 2007, at 11:09 AM, Jeffery Smith wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Yeah, I started one re: people's thoughts on 35mm LTM lenses, but I >>>>>> didn't care if they were FLAT. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jeffery Smith >>>>>> New Orleans, LA >>>>>> http://www.400tx.com >>>>>> http://400tx.blogspot.com/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org >>>>>> [mailto:lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of >>>>>> Daniel Ridings >>>>>> Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 3:16 AM >>>>>> To: Leica Users Group >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Experiences with 35/3.5 Elmar and 35/3.5 >>>>>> Summaron >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Mark Rabiner wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Is it my brain or did we have a 35mm LTM thread last week or the >>>>>>> week before Remember how I mentioned my Summaron? Others mentioned >>>>>>> others? >>>>>> >>>>>> I am sorry to have missed it. I have had to pass over hundreds, if >>>>>> not a couple thousand, postings lately. I just haven't been able to >>>>>> keep up. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for the tip. I'll check out the archives. >>>>>> >>>>>> Daniel >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more >>>>>> information >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more >>>>>> information >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Leica Users Group. >>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Leica Users Group. >>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >