hasselblad Mon, 24 Dec 2001 Volume 1 : Number 1448 In this issue: PME-51 for sale Development confusion!! RE: [HUG] Development confusion!! Re: [HUG] Development confusion!! Developing RE: [HUG] Development confusion!! RE: [HUG] Film Scanner NEwZgrp Re: [HUG] Striking out with digital imaging 120 CB Lens for Hassy Hassy 12 overlap? Re: [HUG] 120 CB Lens for Hassy RE: [HUG] 120 CB Lens for Hassy Re: [HUG] Hassy 12 overlap? Re: [HUG] Striking out with digital imaging RE: [HUG] 120 CB Lens for Hassy Re: [HUG] Striking out with digital imaging Re: [HUG] Hassy 12 overlap? Re: [HUG] 120 CB Lens for Hassy Re: [HUG] 120 CB Lens for Hassy Re: [HUG] Lens diffusion for portraits 120 CB, again 120 CB, again Re: [HUG] 120 CB, again Lens diffusion for portraits RE: [HUG] 120 CB, again RE: [HUG] Lens diffusion for portraits (THANKS!) Camera tripods for the Hasselblad Re: [HUG] 120 CB, again Re: [HUG] 120 CB, again Re: hasselblad V1 #1447 [Fwd: Re: [HUG] 120 CB, again] Re: [HUG] Camera tripods for the Hasselblad Re: [HUG] Camera tripods for the Hasselblad Re: AW: [HUG] Camera tripods for the Hasselblad ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 23 Dec 2001 02:19:56 MST From: Robert Kuan To: "Hasselblad@Kelvin. Net" Subject: PME-51 for sale Message-ID: <20011223091956.20280.qmail@uadvg009.cms.usa.net> It happens I own two PME-51 Meter Prim Viewfinders that I got from Hassel= blad rebates, I bough two camera bodies. I would like to sell one of them, sin= ce I never use two cameras simultaneously, and I am thinking to buy another le= ns. = The one I would sell is the new one that I hardly used at all, it comes w= ith it=92s original Box, manual, and I also have a Diopter =962D/45, +1D/90 p= art number 42420 Eyepiece for it. = Please contact me directly, thanks. Regards, Robert kuan 415-512-8254 robert.kuan@usa.net ____________________________________________________________________ Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.amexmail.com/?A=3D1= ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:54:35 +0530 From: "Sharookh Mehta" To: "hasselblad" Subject: Development confusion!! Message-ID: <001f01c18bac$c9b80280$9b0ec5cb@firstbom3> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001C_01C18BDA.E1F75A20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In the Zone System, we talk of N+1 or N-1 and so on. In actuality, this = is a specific value of more or less development which the film receives. = Thereafter, printed on a specific grade of paper one obtains the = required image.=20 When we talk of scanning a negative and printing it through our = printers is it necessary to give specific development when we can = manipulate tonality and contrast curves through digital software?? I'd like to hear views on this please. Confused// Sharookh ------=_NextPart_000_001C_01C18BDA.E1F75A20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

In the Zone System, we talk of N+1 or = N-1 and so=20 on. In actuality, this is a specific value of more or less development = which the=20 film receives. Thereafter, printed on a specific grade of paper one = obtains the=20 required image.

When we talk of scanning a negative and = printing it=20 through our printers is it necessary to give specific = development=20 when we can manipulate tonality and contrast curves through digital=20 software??

I'd like to hear views on this = please.

Confused// = Sharookh

------=_NextPart_000_001C_01C18BDA.E1F75A20-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 12:33:11 -0000 From: Les Meehan To: "'hasselblad@kelvin.net'" Subject: RE: [HUG] Development confusion!! Message-ID: <01C18BAD.FD3CAE20.les.meehan@zone2tone.co.uk> Hi The answer to whether specific dev is needed depends what you intend to use the original for (don't it always). If you will never use the original for traditional printing in a darkroom then why not calibrate your film development to your scanner. Alternatively, knowing you can adjust the contrast in the darkroom and on the computer, make sure you have max info on the film by developing at N-1 to make sure the high values are held well over a range of subjects. Do tests on your scanner. Don't believe the Dr figures quoted as they are not always achievable. Basically, treat the whole thing as a zone test and calibrate using your normal methods, i.e. scan a step wedge etc. Regards Les ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 18:28:26 +0530 From: "Sharookh Mehta" To: Subject: Re: [HUG] Development confusion!! Message-ID: <001501c18bb1$8457bfa0$aa0ec5cb@firstbom3> Les > If you will never use the original for traditional printing in a darkroom > then why not calibrate your film development to your scanner. Can you elaborate?? Thanks //Sharookh ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 09:02:55 -0500 From: "Dr. Elliot Puritz" To: Subject: Developing Message-ID: <005101c18bba$85135860$b8c49d42@f6bq001> Happy Holidays to all: Now that I have moved away from NYC and it's environs, I need suggestions for color film processing in the Daytona Beach, Jacksonville areas of Florida. Alternately, a place to mail to would be fine as long as the film gets there without being scanned and damaged! I know the subject of processing has been discussed, but some of the labs mentioned do not handle small volume, amateur users. Both print and 'chrome developing, and until I get the darkroom set up again, B&W with proof sheet. Sorry if the subject was discussed before, but I might have missed some of the posts during my move into retirement and golf! TIA, Elliot ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 09:36:24 -0500 From: "Austin Franklin" To: Subject: RE: [HUG] Development confusion!! Message-ID: Hi Les, > If you will never use the original for traditional printing in a darkroom > then why not calibrate your film development to your scanner. > Alternatively, knowing you can adjust the contrast in the darkroom and on > the computer, make sure you have max info on the film by > developing at N-1 > to make sure the high values are held well over a range of subjects. I completely agree, and well said. > Do tests on your scanner. Don't believe the Dr figures quoted as they are > not always achievable. Basically, treat the whole thing as a zone > test and > calibrate using your normal methods, i.e. scan a step wedge etc. and...I can only add that for B&W, the DR of the scanner is not important, as B&W doesn't even come close to having a DR of 3, and most any scanner can achieve that figure...it's only for chromes that the DR figures really become important. I believe that learning how to set your setpoints, as well as tonal curves is the absolute key to getting the best scans...nothing else means anything until you can get these two things down. Regards and Happy Holidays, Austin ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 09:48:40 -0500 From: "Austin Franklin" To: Subject: RE: [HUG] Film Scanner NEwZgrp Message-ID: http://www.halftone.co.uk would be a good place to start...if you have any problems finding the list, let me know and I'll dig some more info up. > -----Original Message----- > From: Daniel K. Lee [mailto:daniel@dklimages.com] > Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2001 1:29 AM > To: hasselblad@kelvin.net > Subject: [HUG] Film Scanner NEwZgrp > > > I'm looking for a good film scanners newsgroup...any recs? > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 07:07:43 -0800 From: David Meiland To: Subject: Re: [HUG] Striking out with digital imaging Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20011223070743.006c0f64@mindspring.com> >Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 18:29:45 -0800 >From: "Fritz Olenberger" >To: >Subject: Re: [HUG] Striking out with digital imaging >Message-ID: <000501c18b59$af9f7de0$225a1518@santab1.ca.home.com> > >David: > I tried some of these things on a 240MB file (that's almost 4 times the >size of your file) that was generated by a drum scan of a 120 slide at >4000ppi, using a PC I got this summer. Using Photoshop 6.0, a crop took 8 >seconds, a sharpen (unsharp mask) took 25 seconds, and a 90 degree rotation >took 3 seconds. In this test, I purged RAM between operations (the first >time around, a sharpen took 45 seconds because I did not purge the memory >from the previous operation, and there was significant hard drive access). >In Photoshop, I set the amount of RAM used by Photoshop to 80%. > My PC has a 1.4GHz Athlon processor and 768MB of DDR RAM. It sounds >like you ran out of RAM, and maybe your hard drive has a slow access time. > I have had good luck with scanned 120 transparencies. I take the files >to a local service bureau, where they make prints using a continuous-tone >Chromira printer on silver-halide paper. Razor sharp 30"x30" prints. Wide >tonal range (due to the drum scan, but the $3000 Polaroid Sprintscan 120 >advertises a Dmax of over 4.0, I think). Smashing color. Zero pixels >visable (due to the continuous-tone printer at 300dpi). Highly archival >(printing on Fuji Crystal Archive paper). > Don't give up on the digital age. You can do stuff easily digitally >that is very difficult with standard darkroom printing, like eliminating con >trails in scenics, eliminating in-laws from group portraits, smoothing >wrinkles, eliminating zits, and so forth. > You may not need a new computer. If you have less than 256MB of RAM, >you might consider buying more. It's pretty cheap these days. >-Fritz Fritz, I'm mostly just grumbling. It looks like there's a LONG way to go before I do anything meaningful with the stuff on my desktop. I've been watching with interest as more and more shops like the Lightroom and West Coast Imaging pop up with (pricy) scanning, retouching, and printing services, and I imagine I'll try ordering some prints that way sometime soon. But I'm not a person who wants to sit behind the computer retouching in-laws or their dermatological imperfections. I HAD hoped to be able to make some decent proofs myself, on occasion, and it looks like even that is going to be time consuming and give mediocre returns unless I upgrade the hardware quite a bit. I am curious about the differences between Fuji Crystral Archive and Ilfochrome. Any comments? DM ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 10:29:32 -0800 From: "Frank Filippone" To: "Hasselblad Users Group" Subject: 120 CB Lens for Hassy Message-ID: Are there any comments out there on this lens? I think it will not work on a 200 series body ( True if I own a 201F???) Any optical differences between this lens and a CFi lens? Mechanical? Thanks Frank Filippone red735i@earthlink.net ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 10:51:16 -0800 From: "Tourtelot" To: Subject: Hassy 12 overlap? Message-ID: <000c01c18be2$cd4363a0$6401a8c0@attbi.com> Hi- Just me being paranoid. I shot a roll of Provia today (first ever) and the crank was pretty stiff. When I looked at the frame numbers through the "peek-a-boo" no consecutive numbers appeared, and I freaked out (magic-hour shots that won't return to Seattle until August ). Only processing will tell. I came home and put a trash roll in and even as the crank turned easier, the frames I marked on the emulsion were perfectly spaced. Frame numbers in the "peek-a-boo" were still off after Frame #1. Can I assume (there's that word again) that if it pulls one type of film perfectly, that it will pull another as well. Or if the mag has "stripped gears" might "easier" film (the VP) be okay and the "stiffer film" (the Provia) might not? Thanks for any experience. Douglas Tourtelot, CAS Seattle, WA tourtelot1@attbi.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 20:04:48 +0100 From: "Q.G. de Bakker" To: Subject: Re: [HUG] 120 CB Lens for Hassy Message-ID: <001601c18be4$b2bcb340$1ae3f1c3@qnu350> Frank Filippone wrote: > Are there any comments out there on this lens? I think it will not work on > a 200 series body ( True if I own a 201F???) No. True only if you would own a 202 FA. > Any optical differences between this lens and a CFi lens? > Mechanical? Both Hasselblad and Zeiss said when asked that they had no info at all about the CB 120 mm lens except that "The CB 4/ 120 mm lens is only available in special product combinations and then only to certain markets". Where did you find one? When i asked again, Hasselblad replied: "I don't have the specifications in front of me but I can get them if you wish." That, of course, was exactly what i has wished. So i asked them a third time. This was the reply: "I will pass on your request about CB 120 specifications to our lens expert." Next their lens expert replied: "I hope that the technical information about the CB120 mm lens already has been given to you." Still not deterred by this, i asked again. Now they replied: "Carl Zeiss have produced some general information on the CB series. [typically very long Zeiss URL snipped by me] I have nothing specific available otherwise to hand but do recommend Carl Zeiss as a source of technical information." And Carl Zeiss? Somehow i don't think they even know they made this lens at all. My guess is that this lens is optically the same as the CF and CFI f/4 Makro-Planars, but in a CB mount. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 11:36:04 -0800 From: "Frank Filippone" To: "Q.G. de Bakker" , Subject: RE: [HUG] 120 CB Lens for Hassy Message-ID: The lens turned up in Hong Kong, which matches the earlier stories of the CB lens line in Asia.... they want them cheaper.....so the lenses were made for that market The Zeiss and Hassy guys sure know how to evade an answer..... So the lens will work on my 201F in F or C mode? Please confirm.... Frank Filippone red735i@earthlink.net ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 11:35:50 -0800 From: Jim Brick To: hasselblad@kelvin.net, Subject: Re: [HUG] Hassy 12 overlap? Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20011223112114.03769f30@pop.alink.net> I've found that sometimes film is just harder to crank than other times. I've not attributed it to any particular film or circumstance. The peek-a-boo hole in the older backs is for aligning frame number one. It has no further use on any camera that has its own built-in gearing. After "1", you would probably never see another number. If I remember correctly from the olden days (620 & 127) the film had a series of 1's, and 2's, etc. Use the big numbers for 2-1/4 x 2-1/4 and use the little numbers for 2-1/4 x 3-1/4. The only camera I knew of that was geared was the Rollei and Hasselblad. I bought a Rolleicord in 1953. My first real camera. Then a Hasselblad in 1960. Jim At 10:51 AM 12/23/2001 -0800, Tourtelot wrote: >Hi- > >Just me being paranoid. I shot a roll of Provia today (first ever) and the >crank was pretty stiff. When I looked at the frame numbers through the >"peek-a-boo" no consecutive numbers appeared, and I freaked out (magic-hour >shots that won't return to Seattle until August ). Only processing will >tell. I came home and put a trash roll in and even as the crank turned >easier, the frames I marked on the emulsion were perfectly spaced. Frame >numbers in the "peek-a-boo" were still off after Frame #1. Can I assume >(there's that word again) that if it pulls one type of film perfectly, that >it will pull another as well. Or if the mag has "stripped gears" might >"easier" film (the VP) be okay and the "stiffer film" (the Provia) might >not? > >Thanks for any experience. > >Douglas Tourtelot, CAS >Seattle, WA >tourtelot1@attbi.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute >Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing >list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, >or affiliates. > >Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. Use >text mode only. > >To change your subscription status, go to: >http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad >Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 11:39:15 -0800 From: "Fritz Olenberger" To: Subject: Re: [HUG] Striking out with digital imaging Message-ID: <002401c18be9$817edba0$225a1518@santab1.ca.home.com> Dave: I don't have any direct experience with Ilfochrome Classic (formerly Cibachrome) prints in terms of their archiveability. I do know that with Ilfochrome, the dyes are in the paper, not in the chemistry. I did a search on the internet and came across the following: www.paulzaretsky.com/fujiarchive.htm "Crystal Archive prints have quickly become the new standard for fine art color photographs. They offer far superior color, tonal range, and sharpness as compared to any other traditional printing method. They also offer far greater archival stability. Crystal Archive prints have been independently tested to be more archival than any other popular printing processes, including Ilfochrome, C-prints and Type R prints. In controlled testing, the paper lasts over 60 years without noticeable fading-- this is over two times longer than Ilfochrome prints." Intrestingly, the Epson Stylus 2000P ink jet printer "boasts lightfastness rated at more than 200 years under fluorescent lighting conditions, before noticible fading occurs." (Calumet catalog, 2000-2001) More comparisons on archiveability can be found at: www.wilhelm-research.com/ As far as the difference in visual quality between Ilfochrome and Fuji Crystal Archive, well... I've never done a side by side comparison. -Fritz ----- Original Message ----- I am curious about the differences between Fuji Crystral > Archive and Ilfochrome. Any comments? > > DM > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, or affiliates. > > Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. Use text mode only. > > To change your subscription status, go to: http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad > Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 11:42:43 -0800 From: Jim Brick To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Cc: "Frank Filippone" Subject: RE: [HUG] 120 CB Lens for Hassy Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20011223113705.0378f858@pop.alink.net> At 11:36 AM 12/23/2001 -0800, Frank Filippone wrote: >The lens turned up in Hong Kong, which matches the earlier stories of the CB >lens line in Asia.... they want them cheaper.....so the lenses were made for >that market > >The Zeiss and Hassy guys sure know how to evade an answer..... > >So the lens will work on my 201F in F or C mode? Please confirm.... > >Frank Filippone >red735i@earthlink.net The lens will work in "C" mode (at least on my 203FE) as you simply set the camera to the "C" mode and you now have a 503 equivalent camera. The built-in meter still works as well, in all modes except manual. I know nothing about the 201. Somewhere I think I remember it won't work with "C" lenses. But I'm not sure. The CB lenses are just newer versions of C lenses, that is, they make no provision for use with 200 series cameras. The 203 & 205 have a C mode for use with all older lenses. 201 ??? Jim ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 11:52:01 -0800 From: Jim Brick To: hasselblad@kelvin.net, Subject: Re: [HUG] Striking out with digital imaging Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20011223114351.01d2dd78@pop.alink.net> At 11:39 AM 12/23/2001 -0800, Fritz Olenberger wrote: >As far as the difference in visual quality between Ilfochrome and Fuji >Crystal Archive, well... I've never done a side by side comparison. I have lots of both Crystal Archive and Ilfochrome prints on my wall (and other people's walls.) There certainly is a difference. The Ilfochrome prints jump out at you. The Crystal Archive prints are great also, but much more subdued. There are different grades of Ilfochrome paper. Only the Super Glossy, Polyester base, normal contrast CPS.1K is rated archival and is rated at 200 years. There is no rating for the other grades of Ilfochrome. They simply say "extremely fade resistant." Jim ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 12:11:40 -0800 From: "Tourtelot" To: Subject: Re: [HUG] Hassy 12 overlap? Message-ID: <000a01c18bee$09147ee0$6401a8c0@attbi.com> Thanks. I feel MUCH better! D. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Brick" To: ; Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2001 11:35 AM Subject: Re: [HUG] Hassy 12 overlap? > I've found that sometimes film is just harder to crank than other times. > I've not attributed it to any particular film or circumstance. > > The peek-a-boo hole in the older backs is for aligning frame number one. It > has no further use on any camera that has its own built-in gearing. After > "1", you would probably never see another number. > > If I remember correctly from the olden days (620 & 127) the film had a > series of 1's, and 2's, etc. Use the big numbers for 2-1/4 x 2-1/4 and use > the little numbers for 2-1/4 x 3-1/4. The only camera I knew of that was > geared was the Rollei and Hasselblad. I bought a Rolleicord in 1953. My > first real camera. Then a Hasselblad in 1960. > > Jim > > > At 10:51 AM 12/23/2001 -0800, Tourtelot wrote: > >Hi- > > > >Just me being paranoid. I shot a roll of Provia today (first ever) and the > >crank was pretty stiff. When I looked at the frame numbers through the > >"peek-a-boo" no consecutive numbers appeared, and I freaked out (magic-hour > >shots that won't return to Seattle until August ). Only processing will > >tell. I came home and put a trash roll in and even as the crank turned > >easier, the frames I marked on the emulsion were perfectly spaced. Frame > >numbers in the "peek-a-boo" were still off after Frame #1. Can I assume > >(there's that word again) that if it pulls one type of film perfectly, that > >it will pull another as well. Or if the mag has "stripped gears" might > >"easier" film (the VP) be okay and the "stiffer film" (the Provia) might > >not? > > > >Thanks for any experience. > > > >Douglas Tourtelot, CAS > >Seattle, WA > >tourtelot1@attbi.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > >The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute > >Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing > >list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, > >or affiliates. > > > >Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. Use > >text mode only. > > > >To change your subscription status, go to: > >http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad > >Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, or affiliates. > > Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. Use text mode only. > > To change your subscription status, go to: http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad > Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 21:43:13 +0100 From: "Q.G. de Bakker" To: Subject: Re: [HUG] 120 CB Lens for Hassy Message-ID: <003501c18bf2$72843ce0$1ae3f1c3@qnu350> Jim Brick wrote: > The lens will work in "C" mode (at least on my 203FE) as you simply set the > camera to the "C" mode and you now have a 503 equivalent camera. The > built-in meter still works as well, in all modes except manual. > > I know nothing about the 201. Somewhere I think I remember it won't work > with "C" lenses. But I'm not sure. The CB lenses are just newer versions of > C lenses, that is, they make no provision for use with 200 series cameras. > The 203 & 205 have a C mode for use with all older lenses. 201 ??? The 201 F camera too, so CB lenses can be used. It is the 202 FA only that does not have a "C" mode. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 13:55:55 -0800 From: Jim Brick To: Subject: Re: [HUG] 120 CB Lens for Hassy Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20011223135500.0376eb98@pop.alink.net> At 09:43 PM 12/23/2001 +0100, Q.G. de Bakker wrote: >The 201 F camera too, so CB lenses can be used. >It is the 202 FA only that does not have a "C" mode. Thanks (and to Frank too). I knew there was an odd ball model somewhere in there. Jim ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:07:15 -0800 From: Mark Rabiner To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: [HUG] Lens diffusion for portraits Message-ID: <3C265591.30FD1877@markrabiner.com> > > Note - some people don't need diffusion. They are actually fuzzy around > their own edges. Just open up a stop or two and light 'em from behind. I > make this joke to all the belly dancers that come in the studio and the > ratio of crying to laughing is now 3:2. > > Uncle Dick > There is not a single shot I ever made since the 70's in which i used diffusion on that i don't regret doing so. All the unsharp mask in the world does not save these shots. They look hokey. Sure i had good excuses at the time to play with that stuff. But i don't agree with any of it now. I find 99.99% of anything i used diffusion on to be unusable in a modern portfolio or show of my work. Which of our favorite photographers used diffusion in the last 30 years? Uncle Dick I'd make your new years resolution to get more resolution out of your Zeiss glass for a whole year. I promise you your photosubjects won't kill you and you wont otherwise die. Look at Edward Westons stuff. He swore it off and was better off for it. If they're ugly just move back "say to Cleveland?!" wrinkly people don't need tight head shots. Or over expose or print them a tad, washing out some bad texture. The fuzzy wuzzies have had their day. Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.markrabiner.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:13:34 -0800 From: "Frank Filippone" To: "Hasselblad Users Group" Subject: 120 CB, again Message-ID: Frank Filippone red735i@earthlink.net ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:14:21 -0800 From: "Frank Filippone" To: "Hasselblad Users Group" Subject: 120 CB, again Message-ID: Hit that button too fast..... I should have asked this... the 120 CB lens is a MACRO or not? Frank Filippone red735i@earthlink.net ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:25:05 -0800 From: Malcolm & Sylvia Brickwood To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: [HUG] 120 CB, again Message-ID: <3C2659C1.4090003@worldnet.att.net> According to my 1999 Hasselblad Products Catalog ... and I quote ... CB120 Code 20055 Zeiss Makro Planar CB 4/120mm "With the makro-Planar design the CB 120mm is optimized for the close up focusing range and the relatively large aperture makes it ideal to combine with close-up accessories. As the optical performance is high over the entire focusing range it is also a useful lens for general photography." Malcolm Frank Filippone wrote: > Hit that button too fast..... > > I should have asked this... the 120 CB lens is a MACRO or not? > > Frank Filippone > red735i@earthlink.net > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, or affiliates. > > Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. Use text mode only. > > To change your subscription status, go to: http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad > Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm > > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 18:08:07 -0500 From: "Altaf Shaikh" To: Subject: Lens diffusion for portraits Message-ID: <014b01c18c06$b7a28b60$de284142@elmert> A rubber band around the black nylon will work just fine. No sense trying to make it permanent because you will want to try diff nylons till you hit the right combination of softness and feel. al http://www.usefilm.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 15:30:38 -0800 From: "Frank Filippone" To: , Subject: RE: [HUG] 120 CB, again Message-ID: Thanks Malcolm.. that answers it.... Frank Filippone ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 16:20:37 -0800 From: Mike Kirwan To: mark@markrabiner.com, hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: RE: [HUG] Lens diffusion for portraits Message-ID: I guess since 1984 I have taken two portraits using a diffusion filter that was a deliberate move on my part. I have has a number of assigments where the paying customer has asked for that soft diffused look and when I showed them comparisons of the same shot with and without the filter, they picked the diffused shot - why, because they said that's how it looks in the movies.......... Mike -----Original Message----- From: Mark Rabiner [mailto:mark@markrabiner.com] Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2001 2:07 PM To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: [HUG] Lens diffusion for portraits > > Note - some people don't need diffusion. They are actually fuzzy around > their own edges. Just open up a stop or two and light 'em from behind. I > make this joke to all the belly dancers that come in the studio and the > ratio of crying to laughing is now 3:2. > > Uncle Dick > There is not a single shot I ever made since the 70's in which i used diffusion on that i don't regret doing so. All the unsharp mask in the world does not save these shots. They look hokey. Sure i had good excuses at the time to play with that stuff. But i don't agree with any of it now. I find 99.99% of anything i used diffusion on to be unusable in a modern portfolio or show of my work. Which of our favorite photographers used diffusion in the last 30 years? Uncle Dick I'd make your new years resolution to get more resolution out of your Zeiss glass for a whole year. I promise you your photosubjects won't kill you and you wont otherwise die. Look at Edward Westons stuff. He swore it off and was better off for it. If they're ugly just move back "say to Cleveland?!" wrinkly people don't need tight head shots. Or over expose or print them a tad, washing out some bad texture. The fuzzy wuzzies have had their day. Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.markrabiner.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, or affiliates. Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. Use text mode only. To change your subscription status, go to: http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 18:27:36 -0600 From: "Thomas Hahn" To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: (THANKS!) Camera tripods for the Hasselblad Message-ID: Many thanks to everybody who volunteered information and opinions on the tripod issue. I learned a great deal from the varied responses that came back: While Uncle Dick suggested a ship's mast from a British balltlecruiser, somebody else pointed me towards the Ries (the J100 seems to be a very fine product), but a ritzy (?) majority is camped out with the latest Carbon Fiber Gitzos. My learning curve was not only about the issue at hand, but also about the people behind this discussion list. I think I'll stick around for a while, it is fun. For starters, I bought the Leitz tabletop tiltall, and a sturdy ole' Linhoff. Thank you all very much indeed, and happy Holidays Thomas in cloudy Ithaca _________________________________________________________________ Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 01:47:21 +0100 From: "Q.G. de Bakker" To: Subject: Re: [HUG] 120 CB, again Message-ID: <00c501c18c14$8ce46f20$1ae3f1c3@qnu350> Frank Filippone wrote: > I should have asked this... the 120 CB lens is a MACRO or not? Yes. It is described in the 2001 Product Catalogue as: "CB 120 - Code 20055 Zeiss Makro-Planar CB 4 / 120 mm With the Makro-Planar design the CB 120 mm is optimized for the close focussing range and the relatively large maximum aperture makes it ideal to combine with close-up accessories. As the optical performance is high over the entire focussing range it is also a useful lens for general photography. The Makro-Planar CB 120 is only available on a limited number of markets and in special product combinations." The 2001 catalogue was the first in which this lens was mentioned. No picture though, nor technical details. Just the above, and a separate note repeating that "The CB 120 mm is only available on certain markets in special product combinations." (Note the note! : the response i got from Hasselblad was copied straight out of their catalogue. Are people well informed at info@hasselblad.se...?) On the same page in this catalogue it is said that "The manufacture of the CB lenses has been discontinued and the availability will cease during 2001." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 01:50:32 +0100 From: "Q.G. de Bakker" To: , Subject: Re: [HUG] 120 CB, again Message-ID: <00ca01c18c14$fe9819a0$1ae3f1c3@qnu350> Malcolm & Sylvia Brickwood wrote: > According to my 1999 Hasselblad Products Catalog ... and I quote ... > > CB120 Code 20055 > Zeiss Makro Planar CB 4/120mm > "With the makro-Planar design the CB 120mm is optimized for the close up > focusing range and the relatively large aperture makes it ideal to > combine with close-up accessories. As the optical performance is high > over the entire focusing range it is also a useful lens for general > photography." > > Malcolm Oops! I hadn't seen your post. If i had i wouldn't have posted the same info. But you say you saw it in the 1999 catalogue? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 20:40:30 EST From: DaveHodge@aol.com To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: hasselblad V1 #1447 Message-ID: <16.17853911.2957e18e@aol.com> With all due respects, let's not turn this board into a digital image processing board. There are lots of other places to discuss the intracacies of image processing. Let's keep this one for Hasselblad issues. Thanks, and Merry Christmas to all. I really enjoy this board. David Hodge, Churchville, MD. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:44:20 -0800 From: Malcolm & Sylvia Brickwood To: Hasselblad User Group Subject: [Fwd: Re: [HUG] 120 CB, again] Message-ID: <3C268874.1000103@worldnet.att.net> Yup -- the 1999 issue is in my hot little hand at this very moment. If you have the Catalog it's on page 17 -- no picture, just the text ;-) Malcolm -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [HUG] 120 CB, again Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 01:50:32 +0100 From: "Q.G. de Bakker" Reply-To: "Q.G. de Bakker" , hasselblad@kelvin.net To: , References: <3C2659C1.4090003@worldnet.att.net> Malcolm & Sylvia Brickwood wrote: > According to my 1999 Hasselblad Products Catalog ... and I quote ... > > CB120 Code 20055 > Zeiss Makro Planar CB 4/120mm > "With the makro-Planar design the CB 120mm is optimized for the close up > focusing range and the relatively large aperture makes it ideal to > combine with close-up accessories. As the optical performance is high > over the entire focusing range it is also a useful lens for general > photography." > > Malcolm Oops! I hadn't seen your post. If i had i wouldn't have posted the same info. But you say you saw it in the 1999 catalogue? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, or affiliates. Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. Use text mode only. To change your subscription status, go to: http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 21:40:51 -0600 From: "Thomas Hahn" To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: [HUG] Camera tripods for the Hasselblad Message-ID: Mrk, this looks like a classic, or perhaps even a heirloom type of sorts. many thanks for bringing this comapny to my attention. Thomas >From: Mark Rabiner >Reply-To: hasselblad@kelvin.net >To: hasselblad@kelvin.net >Subject: Re: [HUG] Camera tripods for the Hasselblad >Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 00:01:45 -0800 > >I've been not using my Gitzo's but a Ries J100 wood tripod. Love it. Its >a whole different kind of deal. Each leg you put where you want it and >tighten it down. And it's just beautiful and feels good and matches my >chair in my studio. > >http://www.riestripod.com/tripod.htm > >Mine is much paler than the one in the picture. > > >Mark Rabiner >Portland, Oregon USA >http://www.markrabiner.com >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute >Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing >list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, >or affiliates. > >Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. Use >text mode only. > >To change your subscription status, go to: >http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad >Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 21:43:07 -0600 From: "Thomas Hahn" To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: [HUG] Camera tripods for the Hasselblad Message-ID: David, many thanks indeed for this detailed note. It was of great help. The Gitzo mountaineer seems to be beyond my reach right now, but between the Leitz tabeltop and the mountaineer, there are plenty of fish in the water. Happy holidays. Thomas >From: David Gerhardt >Reply-To: hasselblad@kelvin.net >To: hasselblad@kelvin.net >Subject: Re: [HUG] Camera tripods for the Hasselblad >Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 22:04:54 -0800 > > >On Thursday, December 20, 2001, at 07:25 PM, Thomas Hahn wrote: > >> >>Hi, >> >>I am new to the list, and a new (proud) owner of a 503cxi/A12/80 C T* >>outfit. I'd like to put this system on a stable platform, and am >>wondering what type of camera tripods _travelling_ photographers >>typically use or would recommend with the Hasselblad. Any guidance and >>advice is greatly appreciated. >> >>Many thanks and greetings from freezing Ithaca, NY. >> >>Thomas Hahn >>th99@cornell.edu >> > >Thomas- >That's a tough question to give a single answer to. It depends so much >on what you want to do with your Hasselblad, and where/how you intend to >do it. There are probably several guiding principles: > >1. Eventually you will have more than one tripod, >2. At some point you will embark on "the quest for the perfect >ball-head...", >3. Good tripods (like good cameras) are not cheap. > >I've found that my tripod needs are met by three units: >1. Leitz table-top tripod, with Leitz ball head: small enough to take >with you anywhere (literally fits in your pocket). This is the one I >have tucked in the bottom of my photo back pack when I don't intend to >take images with a tripod (and then find myself in an "available light" >situation that can't be hand held). Well made, very rigid, but very >limited in terms of height (about 5 or 6 inches tall!). >2. Gitzo, aluminum tripod (model 106, I think): 4 leg sections, >collapses to only 10.5 inches long (not including the compact Gitzo >offset ball-head). This is the one that straps to my pack when I'm >"planning" to take images using support. Not the most robust Gitzo, but >adequate under most circumstances; and very compact & light weight. >3. Gitzo G1348 Mountaineer: 4 leg sections, carbon fiber, very >expensive, but very stable and light weight. Good general purpose >tripod, but too large for most packs. Very versatile as well; this >tripod lets you get the camera to within 4.5 inches off of the ground, >and can extend all the way up to over five feet; all without any >accessories. It's about 24 inches long (not including the ball head) >when fully collapsed. If it were only 10 inches shorter, it would be the >tripod I took everywhere! > >ps: yes, good tripods are expensive ($150 to $800+....); however, my >Leitz tripod, and the aluminum Gitzo are both over 25 years old, and >still work like new. You can also go to any good photo store, and order >replacement parts for them if any part is damaged. Like a good >(Hasselblad) camera, a good tripod is a long term investment! > >I hope this gives you a little insight into what works for one >Hasselblad user. (oh, and don't forget to look at the Hasselblad tripod >"quick coupling" (quick-release) adapter... very convenient little >contraptions ;-) > >-David Gerhardt > >(davidgerhardt@mindspring.com) > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute >Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing >list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, >or affiliates. > >Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. Use >text mode only. > >To change your subscription status, go to: >http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad >Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm _________________________________________________________________ Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 21:45:10 -0600 From: "Thomas Hahn" To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: AW: [HUG] Camera tripods for the Hasselblad Message-ID: Ulrik, this seems indeed to be a very good setup. I made a choice already, but will keep especailly the Arca B1 ballhead on my list of things. Happy holidays Thomas >From: "Dr. Ulrik Neupert" >Reply-To: hasselblad@kelvin.net >To: >Subject: AW: [HUG] Camera tripods for the Hasselblad >Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 09:37:58 +0100 > >Hi Thomas, >I have only one tripod. I use the Gitzo 326 with Arca Swiss B1 ballhead and >an old style Hasselblad quick coupling. This combination is rigid enough >for >a Hasselblad with 500 mm lens and can be carried strapped to my Lowe Pro >Phototrecker AW. A Gitzo 1348 would be a lightweight alternative (though >more costly). > >Ulrik > > > Hi, > > > > I am new to the list, and a new (proud) owner of a 503cxi/A12/80 C T* > > outfit. I'd like to put this system on a stable platform, and am > > wondering > > what type of camera tripods _travelling_ photographers typically use or > > would recommend with the Hasselblad. Any guidance and advice is greatly > > appreciated. > > > > Many thanks and greetings from freezing Ithaca, NY. > > > > Thomas Hahn > > th99@cornell.edu > > ><< Neupert,Ulrik.vcf >> _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. ------------------------------ End of hasselblad V1 #1448 ************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, or affiliates. Please turn off HTML mail features prior to posting to this list. Use text mode only. To change your subscription status, go to: http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm