>
> Camera: TL 120
> Film speed: 800
> The ones at the beach were taken with polarizers.
>
> http://picasaweb.google.com/mcgeejer/ParallelMF3D

jeremy3843 wrote:
>
> Camera: TL 120
> Film speed: 800
> The ones at the beach were taken with polarizers.
>
> http://picasaweb. google.com/ mcgeejer/ ParallelMF3D

The images look pretty good. What film are you using for
your iso800?

I won't comment on all of your images, but here are a few
things I noticed:

Image1 obviously has a tilted horizon. In a viewer, I could
tilt my head and compensate, but on a computer screen, I feel
the water draining out the side :) There is also an exposure
mismatch. Is that in the slide or your scanning?

Images 4 and 7 have a lot of deviation but on the computer
screen I don't have any problems with them. I don't know if
I'd have problem in a viewer.

Image 5, again, is mismatched exposure but the other way from
image 1. Is this from your scanning? When I scan slides, I
always try to scan the two halves of the image in the same
pass and with the same settings. This image also suffers
from a very soft foreground element. For an image like this,
you need to check your DOF charts to make sure everything in
the image is inside the range.

Image15, something funky is going on. The right side has
reflections off the railings while the left does not. Are
your polarizers out of synch? That could start to explain
the difference in exposure, too.
____________ _________ _________ _________ _
John Thurston
Juneau, Alaska
http://stereo. thurstons. us

>
> The film I used was Fuji negative.

> Some of the images that are mismatched may have been
> helped if I'd used the lens shade,

Jeremy McGee wrote:
>
> The film I used was Fuji negative.

So I have to ask, what your intended viewing mechanism for
your images will be. Are you planning on making big prints
for use with something like the mirrorscope viewer? Is the
computer screen your ultimate destination? Did you just grab
some negative film 'cause that's what was handy?

> Some of the images that are mismatched may have been
> helped if I'd used the lens shade,

So the difference in exposure is evident in the original and
is not an artifact of your scanning?
____________ _________ _________ _________ _
John Thurston
Juneau, Alaska
http://stereo. thurstons. us

> Sorry about the horizon..... that was the fault of the tripod which
> happened to be my body standing in uneven sand ;-)

Jeremy McGee wrote:
> Sorry about the horizon..... that was the fault of the tripod which
> happened to be my body standing in uneven sand ;-)

Do you use the TL120's prism finder, or have you switched to a waist
level finder like some people have done?

When shooting with a waist level finder (Sputnik and Yashica Mat) I
always mount a bubble level on the camera. This serves two purposes.
I can be sure that I'm holding the camera level (both in pitch and
roll) and while getting ready to make the exposure I can watch the
bubble and the view finder at the same time. If the bubble is
bouncing around I know I hvae to settle down before releasing the
shutter.

Unfortunately you can't do this with an eye level finder. Some eye
level cameras do have levels visible in the view finder, but that's
not common and it's harder to add one yourself.

--
Brian Reynolds | "It's just like flying a spaceship.
reynolds@panix. com | You push some buttons and see
http://www.panix. com/~reynolds/ | what happens." -- Zapp Brannigan
NAR# 54438 |

> . . . I have tried the prism view finder but it needs
> some type of shade. I've thought of trying to use the
> prism cap as one. It would be nice if it had little
> unfolding metal/or plastic feet that could unfurl along
> the side tracks of the prism. Attached could perhaps be a
> pleated cloth which would extend on either side to create
> a dark area in which the prism image could be more easily
> viewed.

Jeremy McGee wrote:
> . . . I have tried the prism view finder but it needs
> some type of shade. I've thought of trying to use the
> prism cap as one. It would be nice if it had little
> unfolding metal/or plastic feet that could unfurl along
> the side tracks of the prism. Attached could perhaps be a
> pleated cloth which would extend on either side to create
> a dark area in which the prism image could be more easily
> viewed.

I fear we may have a language problem, Jeremy.

If you take a TL120 and remove the big, heavy block from the
top of it, there is a piece of glass.
http://stereo. thurstons. us/tl120/ screen-2007_ small.jpg

This piece of glass is ground on the underside so you can
see an image and use it as a viewfinder. It works great for
framing your image if you hold the camera at about
waist-level and accept the idea that left and right are
reversed in the finder. A folding box around the glass to
cast a shadow on it and make it easier to see is commonly
referred to as a "waist-level finder".

The big, heavy block you took of the top of the camera is
the prism.
http://stereo. thurstons. us/tl120/ prisms_small. jpg

It may be referred to as an "eye level finder". It shields
the ground glass from external light and also makes left and
right movement look "correct" in the finder.

When you wrote:
"I have tried the prism view finder but it needs
some type of shade."

Did you really mean:
"I have tried the finder with the prism removed
but it needs some type of shade."

--
John Thurston
Juneau Alaska
http://stereo. thurstons. us

> John Thurston wrote:
>> "I have tried the finder with the prism removed but it
>> needs some type of shade."
> *That's exactly what I meant! Thanks for helping to
> correct (and clarify) my message.*