Digital BW, The Print

Diane;

You sound like you shoot much of the same thing that I do for my personal
pleasure . . . I earn my living doing food ads and product shots for
packaging (with film thank you). I have used the Pentax 6x7 in the past and
liked it very much . . . never bought one though. I used Hasselblad for many
years, then switched to Mamiya RB/Zs . . . a great camera, but it really is
a studio affair . . . just too bulky to waltz around the countryside with.
At present I am shooting all my personal "MF" with a Sinar and a Toyo Field
using a zoom back (I know, bulkier than a Mamiya . . . but lighter and
greater versatility) . . . I shoot in 6x12, then I scan on an Epson flatbed
. . . am still looking for a good deal on an Imacon scanner (I feel one
coming soon . . . I hope). I have spent the last 6 - 8 months fooling around
with some smaller Epson printers while I try to zero in on what I like for
myself . . . and the projects that I do.

If I were you I would try to get my hands on a Mamiya G. While I am not a
rangefinder nut, and don't know if you are either, it is a light, fairly
compact unit with superb optics (which unfortunately cost far more than
Pentax's optics). It also is a good studio unit because you have a leaf
shutter (excellent outside with fill flash too) . . . you just have to get
over not seeing through the lens . . . not an insurmountable task . . . a
bit of practice, some (many?) goofs . . . and you will find your way.

As to the workflow issue . . . well that is a simple one to fix. If you can
afford the gear, and you are shooting a reasonable amout of film . . . that
means there will be a fairly good "workload" from time to time . . . so do
what any "professionally" oriented photographer would do . . . hire an
assistant to develop the film. You have twenty, thirty, maybe forty or more
rolls to process? (not unreasonable . . . we only have 10 exposures remember
. . . DON'T start using 220 you will regret it). There are a truckload of
people who would jump at a few bucks for a day's work (probably a hell of a
lot of them on this list). There . . . half of your workflow problem solved
. . . if they do a good enough job, maybe then can learn to scan too . . .
ALL of this a damn site cheaper than a Phase One 54 back and it's hundreds
of "accessories" needed to get it to work.

Last point . . . in your calculation, make sure the FIRST thing you buy is
the maximum amount of memory your computer can swallow . . . all of this
super-duper-gee-whiz techno crap will mean spit when you try to open a 100mb
plus file on a computer that goes into cardiac arrest.

good luck

Paul Aparycki


>Thanks all for your input and I'll take any more anyone has to give.

>Ken, I have not shot with a 120 film cam--only 35mm.  I posted from the
site so you'll see I spent some time with a Pentax 67II today but, of
course, didn't shoot >any film.  I do have a pro and con list and way up
there on the con side is the time/expense of processing/scanning, etc.  I
don't print 40" x 60" either--though I >have had very large 'posters' made
and mounted by a graphics company for a client.  The largest I have had
printed (again, for a client) were 18 x 24.  My own >prints are limited by
my  2200 at 13 x 19 for the time being.

snip, snip, snip.

>BTW--I shoot landscapes,  urban landscapes, 'not quite' macros, and still
lifes primarily.  (I do shoot parttime commercially for the furniture and
textile industries >but digital is great for that--and doesn't enter into
this).  I'm pretty proficient in PS, use Quadtone RIP for B/W (not sure if I
said that originally) and I lean toward >b/w, but seem to be processing more
color recently.

>Diane Fields