Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/10/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Len I remember the big push to close off the border around the mid 90's. The patched the fences and put on more patrols but it didn't help much. It kept out the casual shoppers but the vast majority of illegals got bused out of town and crossed near west I 10. It was an interesting experience covering a lot of those things. Would think it's much tighter now after the WTC incident. Walt Leonard Taupier wrote: > Walt, > > You're bringing back memories. I lived in El Paso for 7 years before > getting transferred to Philadelphia in 1983. I took that bridge to > work every day. And saw whole families crossing that river. (not much > of a river now). > > The problem I have with Velvia is the reds are too saturated. I took > a few shots this spring of a field of red tulips. The red was so > saturated you could hardly make out individual flowers. Except for > that Velvia is great. The sharpest E-6 film available today. > > Len > > > On Oct 28, 2006, at 11:51 AM, Walt Johnson wrote: > >> The first time I shot Velvia was in the early 90's. It was on the >> bridge between El Paso and Juarez. Some fellow was getting ready to >> wade across the Rio Grande and had taken off his expensive boots. >> When I saw the results the darn things were so sharp and vivid I >> never shot it again. It looked too damned real! If I were going to >> shoot Mother Nature though it would be with Velvia. >> >> Walt >> >> Leonard Taupier wrote: >> >>> Walt, >>> >>> You're lucky you still have Rodinal. I'm down to my last half >>> bottle. Even J and C never seems to have the older 09 formula in >>> stock. >>> >>> I agree with you on scanned transparency photos. Since I shoot >>> outdoors in sunlight with high contrast Leica lenses, I find the >>> better films like Velvia are much too contrasty though. Kodak E100 >>> is much more natural and gives me beautiful prints. I don't shoot >>> color negatives any more. Not since developing and printing my own >>> color in the mid 80's. The work (and cost) was in the printing. I >>> don't mind trying C-41 though. But I do get E-6 turn around in 24 >>> hours. Very handy. >>> >>> Len >>> >>> On Oct 28, 2006, at 10:20 AM, Walt Johnson wrote: >>> >>>> Len >>>> >>>> Right now I've a bag full of Fomapan 400 and a stockpile of >>>> Rodinal. I can't really tell any difference between TX and HP5 >>>> and if it were not so overpriced I'd shoot Bergger. It had been >>>> quite a few years since shooting any E-6 film but recently I >>>> scanned a transparency and it blew me away. They make fine >>>> monochromes for those seeking details. I've tried to give up b&w >>>> film in favor of C-41 and Photoshop but something keeps tugging >>>> at the back of my mind. >>>> >>>> For one thing, when I process my own b&w it is done right. >>>> Dropping my C-41 off at a lab always makes me nervous. Kodak's >>>> Ultra Color C-41 would almost make doing your own color neg >>>> processing worthwhile though since it is amazing film. >>>> >>>> Walt >>>> >>>> Leonard Taupier wrote: >>>> >>>>> Have you tried an old style film like the Efke (Adox) KB25? I >>>>> like it a lot even if you have to be careful how you handle it. >>>>> I always preferred Panatomic-X and Plus-X to get the tonality >>>>> in my landscapes and still life photos in the 60's. Currently I >>>>> use APX100 and Fuji Acros 100 with X-tol. I still like my DR >>>>> but when a certain mood hits I bring out the Efke and the >>>>> collapsible Summicron. My type of photo never needed the speed >>>>> or the grain of Tri-X. As film shooters we are still very >>>>> fortunate to have these choices. Film ain't dead yet. >>>>> >>>>> Len >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Oct 27, 2006, at 10:48 PM, Walt Johnson wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I've always labored under the assumption slower, thin emulsion >>>>>> films have steeper curves and consequently are higher contrast. >>>>>> I wished it were possible to find some Tri-X circa 1970 >>>>>> because these newer films really seem to lack depth. They are >>>>>> certainly sharp as hell and grainless but also toneless >>>>>> compared to what once was. I picked up a collapsible a few >>>>>> years back with the usual haze that can be hard to see. Leitz >>>>>> redid it for me and image wise it compares with my late model >>>>>> Summicron. >>>>>> I sure can;t help but feel the look we all knew and loved >>>>>> related to film and developer rather than lens characteristics. >>>>>> >>>>>> Walt >>>>>> >>>>>> Alastair Firkin wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Ah, at last I can offer an opinion ;-) I have the >>>>>>> collapsible Summicron on my M3. It is a lens I choose above >>>>>>> others when I want a slightly 1960's feel to the result: >>>>>>> using this lens with Plus X like film makes images I >>>>>>> recognise, gives a feeling that is different to the more >>>>>>> modern glass: I suppose its "softness" and would suffer in >>>>>>> lens tests, but it would have been perfect for your "grab" >>>>>>> shot the other day of the two people kissing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Others will prefer Tri X, but I never liked Tri X. Being a >>>>>>> contrary bastard, I really disliked the high contrast grainy >>>>>>> images my peers were making in the 1970's and therefore >>>>>>> always bought Plus X Pan --- I use mainly APX 100 for the >>>>>>> similar feeling now. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> One down side to the lens is that the f stop ring is a bit >>>>>>> stiff and rotating it sometimes unlocks the barrel, but I'm >>>>>>> used to that now. One plus is that it can be used to pre- >>>>>>> focus with its "tab" far more easily (certainly than the DR >>>>>>> summicron which lacks the tab) because the focus ring is >>>>>>> "exposed" when the lens is "mounted" and easy to feel >>>>>>> without looking. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Great lens in "some" ways and good travel companion. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers >>>>>>> On 27/10/2006, at 23:03, Luis Ripoll wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I would appreciate your experienced opinions about the >>>>>>>> Collapsible Summicron >>>>>>>> 50mm. I had the "Rigid" Summicron, I've sold it because it >>>>>>>> had fungus and >>>>>>>> make a lot of haze, but I regret the nice richness of grey >>>>>>>> tones that this >>>>>>>> lens gave me. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Now I have 3 lenses of 50 mm: Summicron model of the year >>>>>>>> 198/199..., >>>>>>>> Summilux (1964), and the new Elmar. I'm looking for the >>>>>>>> Collapsible >>>>>>>> Summicron to have the "nostalgia" subtle tones of the past. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Could I have some opinions about how it will compare with my >>>>>>>> actual 50mm >>>>>>>> lenses (Summilux and Elmar)? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks in advance for your opinions and advice >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Saludos desde Barcelona >>>>>>>> Luis >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> 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 >