• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Post your Globuscope 4x5 Pictures Here

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Hi Scott,
I have some information on the JML 65 mm lens design. I contacted JML and obtained the design specs for these lenses. I can send scans of the designs if you would like. Also I have the scans of the original camera manual.[/quote[

Grant,

That's major! While you're at it, I'd love these too if possible.

The big deal is that the large element is inside the camera which left a smaller element in the light with a conservative 67mm filter thread.

BTW I used the camera from 1980 to 1995 and shot thousands of shots.

I hope you still have the best of them. They would be of great interest if you could share some.

I cannibalized a Sinar wide angle bellows (took of one of the frames) and used the built in diopters in their viewing system.

Do you have a picture of the setup? Or did you again cannibalize this for something else?


Also news...

The rest of the old stock from Globuscope...& one more complete camera with JML 65mm MINTY $1600 USD so 1 is for sale which means U got a great deal.

Does that mean there is more stock besides that camera?

[/Quote[ALSO They found a large number of good 4x5 plastic GG pieces. Although they would not offer warranty on the discounted cameras, they will ship out the replacement pieces for the cost of shipping and handling.

Count me in for two. What address do we send the request to?

Asher
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Update on my 65mm JML equipped Globuscope camera: I have ordered a Schneider helical focus but it's slow in being delivered!!

Asher
 

scott bye

New member
Hi Asher,

I would be interested in the one of those plastic GG. Did you ever get the maxwell screen for your globuscope?
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Hi Asher,

I would be interested in the one of those plastic GG. Did you ever get the maxwell screen for your globuscope?


I too would love to try the plastic GG as it would save a lot of money. I complained to B&H about my helical focus not arriving and they contacted the Schneider wholesaler and I should get it in about a week. Ideally I should get the Maxwell screen just to have the luxury of a sharp bright screen. not that the original is all that bad besides being concave. How does one get the replacement flat GG?

Asher
 

scott bye

New member
More pictures from the Globuscope

Hi,

Here is some more pictures from the globuscope. I have some shots of waterfalls. For some reason I keep getting the flare at the top of the shots. I don't know if it is because the sun is shooting through the trees or because of a couple of seconds of exposure. It is starting to piss me off because I can't figure out what is wrong. It is not the holders because it happened on 6 pictures. I think it might be lens flare because I tend to angle the camera down to get a nice foreground picture and not have it level. The only pain with the camera is being able to compose in dim light with the 65 JML lens. I did get a better brightscreen off of ebay and it did help, but I think the Maxwell brightscreen would be better. I might have been better off with the Schneider lens.

Could it be the way I am processing the film?

Here is what I use:

A) Jobo Cpe2 with Unicolor e-6 kit, developed @ 105F following directions to the tee.
B) Jobo speed at 2

If you look at the tops of the pictures you can see what I am talking about.


On this one if you look up top to the right you can see a fine line separating the flare. I don't know what this is?



WagnerFallsVerticalAcros100Picassa.jpg





Here is a horizontal pic, again the flare or whatever you would call it is happening again.



Wagnerfallshorizontaltmax100Picassa.jpg




Here is another horizontal shot with Kodak E100VS.

WagnerFallsKodak100vsPicassa.jpg



You can notice the flare in the upper part and middle of trees above the falls. I also notice the fine line in this picture about an 1.8" down from the top and fogging at corners and mostly in the upper part of the film after scanning.

I am trying to figure out a way in PS to see if I can correct this. The dodging and burning is helping but I still can't get it corrected at 100%.

The film was scanned with an Epson 4990 using Vuescan.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Scott,

It's so good to hear from you! Let's address the focus issue first:

The only pain with the camera is being able to compose in dim light with the 65 JML lens. I did get a better brightscreen off of ebay and it did help, but I think the Maxwell brightscreen would be better. I might have been better off with the Schneider lens.

I feel for you, fighting to compose with the JML lens as the push pull mount is crude, clumsy and not smooth! There's no sophistication in the way the surfaces move on one another, so there's a tendency for sticking and jerky movement. so as built, it's so frustrating.

My own Globuscope camera with the JML lens, the same as yours, so frustrated me. The ground glass plastic focussing screen was also badly concave so it was frustrating to the point that I decided to invest in correcting everything at once! The refitted camera is about to be returned to me with the same JML lens in new Schneider helical focus mount and hopefully that issue is solved. Also I have had a new Maxwell Plus scene fitted. So focus should be easier one way or another!

Your other issue I'm studying and so far am flummoxed! Do you use a polarizing filter and a hood or else a flag to shield from flare? Looking at your other pictures, it seems to be a recent occurrence. Have you shot into the light before?

Asher
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Hi,

Here is some more pictures from the globuscope. I have some shots of waterfalls. For some reason I keep getting the flare at the top of the shots. I don't know if it is because the sun is shooting through the trees or because of a couple of seconds of exposure. It is starting to piss me off because I can't figure out what is wrong. It is not the holders because it happened on 6 pictures. I think it might be lens flare because I tend to angle the camera down to get a nice foreground picture and not have it level.....


If you look at the tops of the pictures you can see what I am talking about.


On this one if you look up top to the right you can see a fine line separating the flare. I don't know what this is?



WagnerFallsVerticalAcros100Picassa.jpg



The line is so straight in this new picture, perhaps an edge inside the camera is acting as a shield to limit that flare. The angle could be significant as in your earlier pics, shown below, there's no such line, even though you are, each time, once again, shooting into the light!


MinersCastle1May2012picassa.jpg


MinersFalls1May2012Picassa.jpg


[
Monroe1May2012picassa.jpg

I'd try taking a few pictures changing the angle or adding a large shade to see if the issue is really due to flare.

Asher
 

Jim Galli

Member
Asher asked me to try to help. I think your problem is entirely in-camera, not processing. Think about your 2 second exposure. You needed probably 1 second and went to 2 because of reciprocity failure? The exposure looks fine down in the shadows. Very nice. But think about a zone system assignment. Your zone 2 1/2 - 3 stuff needed the long exposure. Your zone 7 stuff up in the sunlight did NOT. So you actually boosted the upper zones way beyond where they needed to be while you were getting your shadows exposed.

When film gets way more light than it needs it starts experiencing something called 'point transfer'. Grossly over-exposed portions actually sort of leak into the surrounding area. You can see it clearly if you're exposing inside an old building with open lit windows that cross over the edge of the film. The normal exposed area stops at the film holder, but the blown out windows actually go up inside the film holder for another1 - 2 mm. or more. That's what you've got going on up in the trees. Plus your JML, good as it is, and it's a fine lens, is only single coated, so it's not going to handle normal flare like a Canon 5D.

One way people try to get a handle on this situation is to pre-expose the film through a white opaque. Like what is on a light meter. White plastic that evenly distributes all of the light. If you hold a white opaque out in front of the lens so that no image forming light comes in, but some light is able to come in, and calculate the exposure for zone 1 1/2, you can pre-expose your film. What that does is boost zones 2- and 3 up a zone while doing nothing to the upper ends. Then you could expose for 1 stop less, say 1/2 second instead of 2 seconds, and your lower zones that you were doing the long exposure for will be properly exposed and the upper zones won't suffer from 2 seconds they didn't need.

Hope that helps some. The line at the top, I don't have a clue.

Hi,

Here is some more pictures from the globuscope. I have some shots of waterfalls. For some reason I keep getting the flare at the top of the shots. I don't know if it is because the sun is shooting through the trees or because of a couple of seconds of exposure. It is starting to piss me off because I can't figure out what is wrong. It is not the holders because it happened on 6 pictures. I think it might be lens flare because I tend to angle the camera down to get a nice foreground picture and not have it level. The only pain with the camera is being able to compose in dim light with the 65 JML lens. I did get a better brightscreen off of ebay and it did help, but I think the Maxwell brightscreen would be better. I might have been better off with the Schneider lens.

Could it be the way I am processing the film?

Here is what I use:

A) Jobo Cpe2 with Unicolor e-6 kit, developed @ 105F following directions to the tee.
B) Jobo speed at 2

If you look at the tops of the pictures you can see what I am talking about.


On this one if you look up top to the right you can see a fine line separating the flare. I don't know what this is?



WagnerFallsVerticalAcros100Picassa.jpg





Here is a horizontal pic, again the flare or whatever you would call it is happening again.



Wagnerfallshorizontaltmax100Picassa.jpg




Here is another horizontal shot with Kodak E100VS.

WagnerFallsKodak100vsPicassa.jpg



You can notice the flare in the upper part and middle of trees above the falls. I also notice the fine line in this picture about an 1.8" down from the top and fogging at corners and mostly in the upper part of the film after scanning.

I am trying to figure out a way in PS to see if I can correct this. The dodging and burning is helping but I still can't get it corrected at 100%.

The film was scanned with an Epson 4990 using Vuescan.
 

scott bye

New member
Thanks for the help. I remember spotting the different areas in the shadows with the light meter. I just guesstimated at what exposure I felt would be best. I did use the Cokin filter holder with the cokin polarizer. The zone is a little confusing for me, as well as trying to figure out the correct exposure times.

I think that line might be from the baffels on the Jobo 2521 reels that I use in my multi tank. Maybe I am getting some sort of uneven development.

I will have to try the opaque idea in front of the lens.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Scott,

When Per Volquartz discussed high dynamic range scenes, he advocated pre-exposure of film as Jim has aptly suggested. My late father in law, Arthut Lopatin, would do this in the darkroom routinely prior to taken portraits or still life outside or even for printing when trying to get more details from bright white areas, (i.e. dark areas of the film negative).

Here's a good description of the technique used for printing from a negative to make sure that there's detail in the highlights.

gr%20chapel%20pre-flash.jpg


"You can see a diagonal line across the front of this
Greek chapel, with much more texture on the dark
side than the light side. This is because part of the image
(the darker part) has been pre-flashed and part has not.



Here's another nice reference to the technique for taking the film shot in the first place, ultimately we're sent back to Ansel Adams, LOL!


I think that line might be from the baffels on the Jobo 2521 reels that I use in my multi tank. Maybe I am getting some sort of uneven development.

If "protecting" the edge of the film gives those lines, if that's indeed true, it's likely that less development, or less agitation, would give you perfectly clear images, as this top edge is so perfect! The question is how did this processing differ from the previous sheets in post # 1 which are so clean and contrasty.

One has to have an explanation that also takes into account the long exposure and possible halation.

Asher
 

scott bye

New member
Hi Asher,

After reviewing a couple more transparencies that I developed, I think the baffles on the Jobo have nothing to do with the line. It must be from the camera or the fidelity holder line.
This picture is from a Fuji Provia Quickload using a Quickload holder and it is hard to see but a line is there. I made a mistake and over exposed the bottom by not correctly pulling the packet out of the holder. I forgot to press the release button on the Quickloader. You can see that the same thing still happened, so I think Jim is correct about the exposure.
I do want to do long exposures for waterfalls so I will have to try an expo disk or opaque glass and hopefully I can figure it out. It would be nice to get a perfectly exposed slide transparency because I like looking at them on my light table. I really don't like c-41.
Looking at all my waterfall transparencies I am getting the same blown out results if the sun happens to shine through the trees. I believe this did happen on most of my shots. I did take a pic of the same waterfall with my Mamiya 7, so when I get the film back from processing I will post results.
In regards about the line not showing in the one transparency of the sun setting, I think I may have had it professionally developed. Hopefully it is my error and nothing to do with the holder not seating properly or a light leak.

Scott

MunisingFallsPicassa.jpg
 

scott bye

New member
Well I think it may be from a light leak from the camera or the way I am pulling the slide or holder. This was done with a Fuji Quickload 160vs film and holder. The film was professional developed. This was definitely a 2 sec exposure, with the sun at the side. If you look at the top you can see a small leak at roughly the same area as the other pictures. Look at the bottom and you can see the faint horizontal line as marked. Any recommendation on some type of light gasket on the inside of the camera w/o affecting focus plane? Could it be the way the paint on the inside of the camera reflects the light?
I placed a fidelity holder in the camera and used a thin piece of paper to see if there was a small gap between the holder and camera frame, but then the lip of the holder (where it notches/seats in the camera) might keep the light out. The paper slid through the center easily. Maybe the frame has a minute warp to it.

WaterFallLightLeaksPicassa.jpg
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Scott,

Can you put loaded holder in the camera, remove the dark slide and then put the camera under a bright light for 30 minutes and process the film? That would tell you if there's some leak. Also, have you tried a set of film holders you have not recently used?

Your pictures previously seemed not to have any evidence of problems so what has happened? what might you be doing differently?

My own camera is coming back next week so I'll see if I have a similar problem! Although the Globuscope camera is made of thin steel, it seems sturdy enough. However, I imagine if stuffed in a bag loaded up with heavy gear, it could, perhaps suffer distortion.

Asher
 

scott bye

New member
Hi Asher, I will do that. Let you know, soon. I babied the camera to make sure it was never piled up or things thrown on it. That test sound like a good idea. I don't think it is the film holders because I used the quickload holder and fidelity and it happened on both of them.
 
Try this to locate a light leak:

Open the shutter and iris in the lens, insert the film holder, and then organise a perfectly shielded bright light so that it can shine into the camera through the lens. Take the set-up into a darkroom, let your eyes dark-adapt, switch on the light. Any light-leak will be strikingly obvious and easy to locate when you look at the light-filled camera from all angles. Then go through the motions of pulling the darkslide and re-inserting it to check if a gap opens up. This test, if well done, will discover light leaks even the sun can't find.
 

scott bye

New member
Hi,

I did keep the camera outside for 30 mins with tmax 100, developed it in rodial 1:50 for 12 mins, stopped then fixed for 5mins. The sheet turned out a light pink. I didn't notice any light leaks.
 

Grant Kernan

New member
Scott,
I am wondering if your highlight areas are bouncing around inside the camera on the black teflon like coating. In 1980 I scratched that coating in my first camera so I lightly sanded the whole inside area [not through the coating to the shinny Stainless Steel--- just to scuff the finnish so that another material would stick to it] and then I used a Flat black Gesso on the surface to absorb reflections. Or a black flat oil based model paint. You could instead line the camera with black flocking.
Shorter exposures with a reduced contrast range may not show this but a long exposure with mostly dark areas with a few brightly over exposed areas will most likely show the bounce landing in darker areas.... Especially when you account for the nose shape of the camera and the possibility of light bouncing against the angled part in close proximity to the edges of the film...
?

Maybe this will help.
 

scott bye

New member
Hi Asher,

It's been awhile since I have been to the forum. I was thinking the same thing. I noticed when I shined a flashlight through the front lens, it seems like the light was reflecting on the side of the black paint finish.

When you say flocking material, do you mean paint or a type of cloth. I don't want to paint to decrease the value of the camera.

Scott
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Hi Asher,

It's been awhile since I have been to the forum. I was thinking the same thing. I noticed when I shined a flashlight through the front lens, it seems like the light was reflecting on the side of the black paint finish.

When you say flocking material, do you mean paint or a type of cloth. I don't want to paint to decrease the value of the camera.

Scott

Hi Scott,

The material is available from scopestuff.com. They'll send a sample if you wish! I've not used it but is appears to be what you might like and it's only $19!

Asher
 
Hi Scott,

The material is available from scopestuff.com. They'll send a sample if you wish! I've not used it but is appears to be what you might like and it's only $19!

And here you have another source. It apparently has a very high absorption of more than 99%, at all angles, and it doesn't shed. I've been meaning to order some, but haven't done so yet, so I cannot testify from my own experience but I saw it recommended by Astronomers.

It would be interesting to compare some samples.

Cheers,
Bart
 
Top