OK, all shots taken and negs hanging to dry.

OK, I think I have come up with a testing scheme that will arrive at reasonable results in short order - or at least get me going in the right direction. I will:

1. Load 3 film holders
2. Shoot the even side of the film holder at box speed
3. Shoot the odd side of the film holder at half box speed - over exposed 1 stop - half the numeric shutter speed.
4. Develop each holder's contents separately at 5.5, 6.5 & 7.5 minutes.
5. All shots will be of the same subject taken at essentially the same time with the same aperture settings.

I will have 2 sheets in the tank for each development time, so have to do 3 development cycles and will have 6 different exposure/development times to see what is best. I will update when I have results.

Yes, the data sheet time I quoted is for tank with agitation at 1 minute intervals. There is another for tray/tank with gaseous burst agitation - whatever that is, but I will be using a Patterson tank with a 1 minute then 10 sec/minute agitation scheme

(Download)

I have been given a box of 100 sheets of 4x5 Tri X 320 that has an expiration date of 1988. My friend noted that it has been in his freezer for the last 30+ years. When I opened the box, the data sheet states that the development time at 20*C with agitation at 1 minute intervals is 7.5 minutes. The Mass Dev chart notes that sheet Tri X 320 develops at 3.25 minutes for tray & 5.5 minutes for tank. Both charts are using HC110 (B) developer.

Has there been a change in Tri X since 1988 that would account for these differences? Given that the film is freezer stored, for starters, I am planning to use the chart that was in the box with the film. The box had not had its seals broken and the film was in its sealed internal wrappers. Any additional input y'all may have is appreciated.

Side trips to Big Bend and McDonald Observatory.

My dad died in 2012. I have boxes of slides and albums of prints but I have ZERO of his digital images.

Yup, we are getting old & times are a changing.

I just got back to my computer. This image was done in the darkroom and lit with the phone. It is a composite of 8 separate images. Almost every surface was blown out in at least 1 of the shots.

(Download)

Composite your shot. You take several shots with the camera on a tripod - don’t move it. You move the light source around and light the various parts of the image separately and from slightly different angles. Then in PS, pick the best lit parts and put your image together.

For smaller items, you can use your cellphone as the light source. Go into a darkroom and set your camera for a long exposure Say 10 seconds, then move your phone to light the subject (with a mainly white screen, I use a blank note page). Take a number of these shots and you then do a composite of those shots.

I have Nikon SLRs & DSLRs including the D500. I also have the X-T2. I got the X-T2 with the 18-55 & 55-200 lenses as a briefcase kit and to test out mirrorless. I have since picked up the 23 f/2.0 as a street/bad weather lens.

I had read that the Fuji did well in IQ, but, me being the skeptic, I had to try it out to see for myself. I figured that even if it was just OK, having an OK camera in my briefcase, which wasn’t going to be my D500 kit, beat not having a camera at all. For general use, I have not been disappointed. I frequently print 13”x19” and the Fuji holds it’s own with my Nikon gear. For knocking around, if I want a digital camera, it has become my go to and it is small & light enough with the 18-55 to ride along in my 4x5 bag when I am out taking things a bit more slowly.

I don’t plan to get rid of my Nikon gear. The D500 is better at action and low light because, except at 23mm, I have faster lenses for it. The fast Fuji lenses, while excellent, don’t meet the primary mission of a briefcase camera - size & weight.

Pros of the Fuji
Light weight
IQ
EVF - lets you pre-chimp
External knobs for controls
The lenses have an aperture ring that is actually used to set the aperture
No “modes” selector, although you can easily achieve the same result
Lens quality across the line up
Great film simulations

Cons
Size - while great for a briefcase kit, the body is quite small
EVF - pre-chimping can let you get lazy
EVF - camera must be on to see through it, otherwise it’s just a black hole
Battery life, I always have 3 on me
Decent but not great for action
BBF button lacks feel and placement is awkward

Mommy Dearest is on the loose.

[SARC]Wow, was that the first time somebody did that?[/SARC]

Well, if it was shot with a lens baby or a tilt/shift lens, that may be the only way to get the look.

Without sideline access, what are you hoping to accomplish at a top tier sporting event? If you are in the stands trying to get the pro shots, you will have to have at least a 400 f/2.8 and likely a 600 f/4. You also won’t get the same angles as the pros on the field/court. Here’s an idea, practice where you can get access and build up a portfolio to earn the creds to get where you want to go.

It generally worked Ok with the D70s. On the F100, N90s, D200 & D500 it pretty consistently back focused. It took a trip to the Tamron Spa and nothing improved. That is why I have it paired with my D70s as a grandkid training kit.