Stearman 445 tank

Darren Lewey

Member
Registered User
Of course the one inconsistency across the 3 test recordings was the level of exterior brightness. The first and largest problem occurred in the brightest sun, the second(portrait) late afternoon light and the last pool Foma shot, when the camera was set in the shade. I will try an ever present dark cloth. Thanks.
 

David M

Well-Known Member
Registered User
I believe that people have refurbished their light traps, but we must look to other members for advice. There is almost certainly someone who knows. They are an astonishingly clever bunch.
 

David M

Well-Known Member
Registered User

Something to encourage you, I hope.
Here is someone who has more problems than you and he's giving instructions to others!
Copal 1, 2 and 3 indeed! (In the Q&A.) As for his explanation of the blank sheet...
He does seem to be very enthusiastic about adjustment layers.
A discussion about what constitutes a Fine Art Print belongs elsewhere.

I came to this after watching one of Ben Horne's videos. He's getting very fond of showing us his journey.
 

Ian Grant

Active Member
Registered User
Those welding rod storage tubes are really cheap unless bought as BTZS tubes - the make is on the bottom :D

In another thread I mentioned recently buying a second 5x4 Dallan tank. I posted images of my first when asked for examples of LF developing before the Stearman tanks were designed and produced. I think what's different it the way the film sits in the holders at the edges with the Dallan tanks it's a V shape fairly open and has less effect on agitation and unevenness.

Ian
 

Darren Lewey

Member
Registered User
The latest images... Fomapan 200 rated at 100. 10 mins, 20 degrees. 1/15, f 5.6. 1/8 is too slow for portraits but 1/15 seems to just about control subject movement in non-pro sitters. The first image works for me in terms of tone so a tick for Fomapan. I'm still getting some casts in the top left as seen more in the second. These are present on 2 of the 4 from the same shoot and same tank development. Very odd.
 

Attachments

David M

Well-Known Member
Registered User
Characterful portraits.
The marks look like light leaks from somewhere. It seems very unlikely the the tank is causing them unless the light-trap plates are in the wrong order and even then, they seem to be in the wrong place for that.
This is the top of the image so it would be at the bottom of the frame in camera. Possible causes: worn-out hinge tape; imperfect seating in the camera back; bellows not perfectly fixed in place; undetected shiny surface inside camera. That's all I can think of. Keep up the excellent work. Does it extend into the unexposed margin?
 

Darren Lewey

Member
Registered User
Thanks David. No fogging in the margin. Why 2 out of 4? The camera position was the same. I've checked the camera and nothing seems amiss but I'm not familiar with the workings of 5x4. The camera itself was bought in near mint.
 
Last edited:

David M

Well-Known Member
Registered User
No fogging in the margin suggests that it must have happened while the film was in the holder. It it had been in the developing tank, the whole surface would be uncovered and any fogging light could reach the whole surface.
Can you track if the two were in the same holder?
 

Darren Lewey

Member
Registered User
There's a strong possibility, I can't be sure but 75% likely. The holder itself appears to be fine, but I can run some tests tomorrow with it in bright sun.
 

David M

Well-Known Member
Registered User
Yes, it would only need a very small fault over a relatively long period to produce the slight fogging. It's had much less exposure than the image itself.
 
Top