Here is our current calendar of upcoming events. More information available by clicking on the item in the ticker above. We invite everyone interested in film photography to join us, though we specialize in LF and ULF, we love all film. Hope to see you at one of our gatherings!
It is important that your view camera work and work smoothly without glitches in the field. Nothing is worse than having some issue when you are out working. I spend a lot of time maintaining our cameras. I feel it is better to do this before we go out, than to have problems that require work in the field. Nothing is worse than wasting time on repairs when you are out.
A high-quality Microcrystalline Wax is one of your best friends when it comes to keeping your view camera clean and working smoothly. See my previous post titled “Wax On. . . Wax Off” for more information about waxing the camera.
But, waxing the camera is only part of keeping it functioning smoothly. You need lubrication for the metal parts. Metal rails, guides, and locking knobs need lubrication to keep them working freely. Nothing is worse than having a threaded part to seize up in the field. The best lubrication for metal parts is a dry lubricant. One that goes on wet but dries leaving a slick lubricant that does not get on your hands and possibly on your lenses or film. A dry lubricant also does not attract dust and dirt.
One of the best lubricants I have found is a product made for lubricating bicycles. Pedro’s Ice Wax 2.0 is a natural wax-based dry lube for use on bicycle chains. It is also an excellent choice for the metal-to-metal parts of the view camera. It works on brass, steel, and aluminum surfaces equally well. The manufacturer says it is a Hydrophobic wax coating that repels water and provides protection from wear and contaminants. It goes on wet and dries leaving a lubricating film that keeps parts moving freely.
So. . . everyone has their preferred brands, methods, techniques and such. I have mine for sure. As Fred Picker said, “if you have been around for twenty years or more and haven’t formed any opinions, what have you been doing?” I miss Fred!There seems to be a lot of paper developer formulas floating around. My wife and I have tried our share of so-called ‘magic’ formulas. We have been down the Amidol road, and don’t get me wrong, Amidol is a great developer but it is far from magic. Amidol is about the best I have found for Azo. Yes we do print on Azo, in fact, we have a stock of it on hand. I would just like to go on the record as not being a person that subscribes to the idea there are magic bullet formulas. There is what works for you and that can be anything that suits your way of seeing. Anyone that has a one-size-fits-all attitude, usually has something to sell.
We have had our frustrations with Amidol developers. And I am not convinced that it is the best, certainly not the only, developer suitable for Azo or any other paper. In a side-by-side test my wife and I determined that Amidol was our developer of choice several years ago. There is a subtle edge there that is not something you can put into words, but there is a difference we decided worth exploring. But Amidol is expensive and can be frustrating to use at times. Yes, we have tried all of the popular formulas. I have just not been too impressed with the results I have obtained at times. What I was searching for was a cold-tone developer. Not only for Azo, but for the other printing papers we use. At times Amidol was still giving a green cast on Azo. Not bad but annoying and required lengthy toning in selenium to offset. I like a cold, neutral tone for most of what I print and the Amidol formulas just wasn’t consistent enough for me. I was not happy with how things were working. It was time to do some research.
I found a lot of interest on the Internet about a Pyro base paper developer formulated by Donald Miller. Mr. Miller named his developer Pyro Plus Paper Developer (PPPD) and after reading about this formulation I was inspired to give it a try. Believe me it takes some inspiration to get me to try something new, but I was frustrated with Amidol and I needed some good news for a change.
From all of the discussions about PPPD I found one thing was clear; there were numerous variations to the formula. The original published formula called for both Pyrogallol and Pyrocatechol. Now this is where things get a little confusing. I don’t recall where I found the particular variation that I tried, but there was a suggestion from somewhere to replace the Pyrogallol with Citric Acid. Not sure where I found that, but that was the formulation that I first tried.
From what I gathered, adding the Pyrogallol and changing the amount of Potassium Bromide makes a more warm-tone developer. I was not interested in warmer, I wanted a cold, neutral developer. To my surprise the variation I tried worked very well. It more than met my requirements, and so far, has yielded very neutral cold tone results on the Azo we have on hand. No more green tint, just what I wanted! It has also proven to be excellent with all other papers we use. And, for those that are economy minded, Pyrocatechol is much cheaper than Amidol.
PPPD keeps very well in an open tray once mixed, but should be dumped at the end of a printing session. I have never had it to die in the tray from oxidation. It does die from exhaustion, just like most any other developer. I would estimate that after about twenty 8×10 prints per liter, you should start looking to mix some fresh developer.
This particular formula also keeps well as a premixed two-part stock solution. Part ‘A’ is mixed 1:1 with part ‘B’ for use. I found that by mixing one liter of both part ‘A’ and part ‘B’ and storing it in full brown glass bottles it keeps at least six months. At least at this point in my experiments that is as long as I have stored the stock solutions. I keep three to four one liter bottles mixed and on the shelf in the darkroom. When we go to print, you just dump a bottle of part ‘A’ and part ‘B’ into a tray and away you go.
I really like this developer and my wife is using it also. So if I am asked what developer I am using, I say now days it is my variation of Donald Miller’s PPPD. My bottles are marked PPPD-JBH for my personal favorite formula.
Oh. . . almost forgot. . . I guess if you have read this far you are interested in the version of PPPD we are using. Here is the formula that we have found to work very well with every paper we use, including Azo. Maybe it will work for you. . . maybe not. The only way to find out is to, as Fred Picker would say, “TRY IT!”
Please note that this developer contains chemicals that could be hazardous. Practice safe handling procedures when mixing chemicals. Wear gloves or use tongs when working with PPPD. In fact, it is a good idea to wear gloves when using any print or film developer.
Keep in mind this is a cold-tone developer. If you search the Internet you will find more information on other variations of the PPPD formula. Supposedly adding Pyrogallol and varying the amount of Potassium Bromide makes this a warm-tone developer, but I have not tried it, since I was not interested in warmer print tone.
I would like to personally thank Donald Miller, and all the others involved for laying the groundwork and publishing this formula, and its numerous variations, for Pyro Plus Paper Developer. Anyone wishing to experiment with PPPD, or seeking more information, try an Internet search for Pyro Plus Paper Developer.
http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/PyroPlus/pyroplus.html
I have struggled for years to understand the concept of what is visually stimulating. Just exactly what does it take to strike a nerve that leads to the successful completion of an expressive photograph? Specifically, why is it that I cannot easily find something in my immediate environment that I find worthy of photographing? There was a time when I really thought there was something wrong with my perception of my surroundings. Edward Weston said something to the effect that, you should be able to look down at your feet and find something interesting to photograph. Doesn’t always work for me.
The trouble is, I have a difficult time finding anything within my local surroundings that excites me very much. Some of this has to do with the fact that I live on a flat coastal plane at 600 feet above sea level and what I like the most is mountains and snow. I just can’t seem to find barb wire fences to the horizon, hay rolls, or wind mills that interesting.
I used to think this was only a personal mental issue that I alone suffered from, and that I was in some way creatively impaired. I thought that all I needed to do was find some magic somewhere that would allow me to visually connect to what I see every day. There were those times that I was able to find visual stimulation. Such as dense fog, or really interesting clouds, or maybe a rare snow storm. But most of the time I found that I was forcing myself to just get out and that what I created was not something I really cared for. So, why bother?
As I began to associate with other photographers, many living in other areas of the country, what I found was surprising. I met and talked with people that live in some of what I feel are the most visually stimulating places on the earth. To my dismay some of them have no interest whatsoever in even visiting, let alone photographing what I would give near anything to have unlimited access to. I have talked to people that have grown up within a few hours drive of these places and have never visited, let alone ever had even considered to take a look, let alone make a serious photograph of what lay literally in their back yard.
I began to realize that I was not alone when it came to finding inspiration and visual excitement within my immediate environment. I began to think more in terms that this is a normal ‘thing’. . . a ‘syndrome’. . . a ‘phobia’. . . or whatever, that many other suffer from, or in some way deal with, also.
1 “The Thing Itself; The fundamental principle of photography” First published in Newsletter, Daytona Beach Community College, 1988
http://www.billjayonphotography.com
If you are like me, you really hate having to spot prints. You especially do not like spotting negatives. I struggled for years trying to come up with a good way to spot prints. The problem is getting a good look at what you are working on, with enough detail to accurately guide that hair-fine spotting brush to just the right spot. I used a loop. . . tried magnifying glasses. . . used a magnifying viewer for some time, but nothing gave me a really good view of what I was working with.
Somewhere along the way someone suggested using a stereo microscope. What a stroke of genius!
After doing some research it became clear that a high-quality inspection microscope, with magnification in the 8x to 10x range was prefect for spotting both prints and negatives. A good stereo microscope with zoom was exactly what is needed. The ideal setup would have a long boom stand so you can swing the head out over the work area, and for spotting prints you need an illuminator. I was able to find an entire microscope package including a zoom stereo head, eyepieces, long boom stand with heavy base, and illuminator on eBay.
The microscope head that I have has a zoom range of 0.70 to 3.00 x. Using a set of eyepieces that are 10x, I have a zoom range of 7.0 to 30.0 x. This is perfect! Most of the time 7x is fine, but if I have a really tiny pinhole I can zoom in even more. The microscope illuminator is necessary for working with prints, while you will need a light box for working on negatives. This is why you need a good, adjustable, boom with a heavy base.
It takes a little getting used to, but a stereo microscope is the Rolls Royce of spotting magnifiers. Well worth the expense. This type of microscope setup is used in manufacturing quality control to inspect small parts and comes up in the used market frequently. Searching out a good microscope will save you a lot of headaches and make that unpleasant chore of spotting a little more tolerable.
JB
We recently had an interesting conversation with a local gallery curator and found that we unanimously agreed on one thing. Most art and all photography should be displayed in the most simple manner possible. Nothing is more distracting, and annoying, than an obnoxious presentation. Large, gaudy, frames with funky colored mats are just plain ugly. Our approach is to keep the presentation simple. The framing and mat should be completely transparent. It should only exist to isolate and protect the photograph. If you notice the frame and mat before you see the image, it is just not right. The KISS Principle (Keep It Simple Stupid) is the only way to display photographic art.
For us, you will not find any of our prints mounted and matted with anything other than pure white, acid free mat board. If we frame for exhibition, we use narrow black aluminum frames. The only other frame we would consider would be narrow natural finish maple. Our first choice for glazing would be glass, with acrylic as the second choice. That is it. Anything else is just plain gaudy and unnecessary.
As much as I try to not talk continually about the gear, it seems that I always end up talking shop anyway. So, here I go again talking about another project. Having built two vertical pano cameras for Susan I promised myself no more camera building. Well, I do not seem to listen to myself all that well. I have this thing about big negatives. I have chosen the 8×10 to be my every day format. But there are times that I envision something just a little larger. In reality, my favorite format is 11×14, but the camera I have been using weighing in at about 24 pounds limits its usability. The idea of a more user friendly 11×14 has been rattling around in my head for some time. I spent a lot of time looking at various camera designs with particular interest in the lighter, more back friendly, cameras.
The nice thing about building your own, is you can pick and choose the features and design that best suits you. This is exactly what I did, and I ended up with a camera that is a conglomeration of designs.
The end result is what I call the Ultra-Light 11×14. Here are the specs;
FORMAT — 11X14
FILM BACK — Horizontal/Vertical
BELLOWS — Max: 36.0” Min: 5.5”
FRONT SWING — Limited by Bellows
FRONT SHIFT — +/- 2.0”
FRONT RISE — +/- 3.0”
FRONT TILT AXIS — Limited by Bellows
FRONT TILT BASE — Forward: 45º Back: 90º
REAR TILT — Forward: Limited by Bellows Rear: 35º
REAR SWING — +/- 10º
GROUND GLASS — Acrylic
WOOD — Cherry
FRAME — Composite & Aluminum
FOLDED — 18” x 19” x 6”
WEIGHT — 13.5 lbs
The most important thing here is the last item, Weight! Once all of the camera was finalized, Susan had to build a pack to haul everything. Took several weeks, but I now have a complete 11×14 packable camera system. The pack carries the camera, three lenses, accessories, three film holders, and weighs in under 45 pounds!
Now it is time to get out and get back to what is important, making photographs. This, I hope, will be my last camera building project.
JB
P.S. Take a look at my previous post titled, “THE VIEW CAMERA IN THE FIELD” November 25th, for another photo of the Ultra-Light 11×14 with pack on its second outing.
