At 06:20 PM 7/7/2001 -0400, Mike Darling wrote:
>Hey all,
>
>I have access to some of my family's photos that I'd like to make copy
>negatives of. Most are large (16x20) prints made by a relative when he
>headed the physics dept photo team at Princeton University. Lots of big
>name physicists and famous test set-ups and things like that. Also some
>press photos from the 1930's until around 1955.
>
>OM CONTENT -- Which lens should I start with to make copies? I have a
>50/1.4 and a 100/2.8 in the bag and I'm guessing staying with primes would
>be the best thing. I've got a BIG old tripod that I'm going to use for my
>OM-1.
Of the two, I'd be tempted to either use (a) the 50, but from further away, or
(b) the 100, trying to fill the frame. Make sure you stop down a few stops
with either lens -- better performance, less centre-to-edge difference in light
falloff, less vignetting, etc.
>I could also do 6x6 negs with my KowaSIX and 80mm lens.
>
>Lighting will be from 2 clip on lights with reflectors.
>
>Film suggestions? Right now I'm considering TMAX-100 or PanF. Any other
>easily processed, fine grain films that come to mind?
Delta 100. I'm really starting to love the stuff. Use Ilford's own special
developer (Ilfotec DD-X) for best results, although any high-energy developer
should do. Ilford supplies lots of tech info for other manufacturers'
developers on their website.
>And the final question... Would scanning these big prints in sections be
>possible to produce quality results? I have access to photoshop and I am
>competent enough to stitch them together with the software, but will it be
>more trouble than its worth?
"More trouble than it's worth." IMNSHO as a Photoshop weenie, anyways. Mind
you, if you've got access to those BIG flatbed scanners... 8^>
Garth
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|