Here is a quick tip list on letters for the HELP! desk:
Please confine yourself to only one question per letter. Both postal letters and e-mails are fine, although we prefer e-mail as the most efficient form of communication. Send your e-mail queries to email@example.com with Help in the subject header and your return e-mail address at the end of your message. Although we make every effort, we cannot promise to answer every HELP! letter.
When sending a response or suggestion that refers to a published letter please include the month and page of the
All postal letters to HELP! must be accompanied by a stamped, self-addressed envelope to be considered for reply. We will respond to e-mail queries with an e-mail.
3D Print Processing Source
Regarding a reader request in a recent HELP!, in the latest Stereo World magazine there is full-page ad for Snap 3D (2255B Queen St. East, Ste. 122, Toronto, Ontario M4E 1G3, Canada; (814) 209-0059; fax: (416) 690-6635; www.snap3D.com). They mention lenticular printing for old three- and four-lens cameras.
Thanks for sending the address of this firm. I get several inquiries each year from readers seeking this type of printing service. Ironically, another reader informed me earlier this summer about a new firm, CLIK 3D, that makes lenticular prints from two-, three-, and four-lens cameras. Their contact information: CLIK 3D, Unit 18, 3909 Witmer Rd., Niagara Falls, NY 14305; (888) 262-8682, (416) 516-6938; www.clik3D.com. They also have a mailing address in Canada.
Another 3D Option
Regarding your HELP! response about 3D processing in the September 2005 issue of Shutterbug: If no one makes lenticular prints any longer, there is another way to view the results which is a lot of fun to do. The "end" negatives from each image (e.g., negatives one and four from a Nimslo) can be printed and mounted on a 31/2x7 stereocard, and viewed on an antique stereo viewer. The results are great, and much more satisfying than a lenticular print.
Bloomfield Hills, MI
I contacted Mr. Magid as a follow-up on his excellent suggestion, and queried
him about where he might suggest readers get a stereo viewer such as the one
he describes. A follow-up e-mail from him contained the following: "My
wife bought an antique stereo viewer in Canada several years ago in an antique
mall outside of Windsor, Ontario. It was about $60 US. About 3/4 of all antique
stores seem to have at least one of them. Also, I went to the website of the
National Stereoscopic Association, www.stereoview.org, and they have links to
many stereo equipment suppliers. For processing, I printed my Nimslo negatives
in my digital darkroom and made the end prints each about 3x3". I mounted
them on a 31/2x7 piece of matte board. For good instructions on making stereocards,
go to www.skep.com/3d/holmscrd.htm."
A reader wrote in recently about fitting his Rollei QBM lenses to some other body. Although I would tell him that having the SL35-series camera repaired is very possible and much less expensive than a new body, there is, in fact, another option. Jurgen Kreckel (www.certo6.com) also frequently sells Rollei SL35 and Voigtländer VSL3-E cameras that have been refurbished. Kreckel is an entirely reputable seller. I've purchased two VSL3-E bodies, a winder, several lenses, and a couple of folding cameras from Kreckel and I was so happy with his service and quality.
Another reader was seeking an EOS adapter. A quick bit of Google-ing revealed a couple of sources of information about various EOS adapters: www.outbackphoto.com/the_bag/ paul_lens_adapters/essay.html and www.skgrimes.com/product/ adap/specadap/index.htm. S.K. Grimes indicates on their page that they make various lens to camera adapters. S.K. Grimes is a regular advertiser of your magazine--and a really fantastic bunch of folks who've helped me on a couple of occasions. Your reader may get some hope of a solution from them.
I appreciate your sending this helpful data. Just knowing you are a satisfied customer of these firms helps the reader be more comfortable when dealing with them.
Q. When working with black and white film, is there a rule of thumb for reducing developing time for a known overexposure that would approximate a properly exposed and developed negative using, for example, D-76 as a straight and or diluted (1:1 or 1:2) developer with Plus-X and or Tri-X and other similar films?
A. I bounced your question off a local friend, John Eric Hawkins, who works extensively in large format black and white fine art photography, using a variety of tray processed sheet films and camera equipment to produce gorgeous display prints. He says with grossly overexposed black and white negatives there is usually no way to cut processing time to obtain a fully usable negative. It depends on the degree of overexposure. You might want to try a clip test and process just several frames at a shortened processing time, then process the remainder of the roll at the exact same time if the test proves to be printable in your lab. Just be sure to keep a consistent time/temperature/agitation on the final processing to match that used on the clip test. A word of caution, however, about the danger of overexposure and underdevelopment--this can result in the lowering of overall contrast to the point of obtaining a flat negative. For more detailed data on black and white processing you might want to obtain a recent copy of The Negative by Ansel Adams, which delves into this subject in depth.