[HUG] Re: Looking XPan Users

On 25/10/2007, Henk Westerhof <Henk.Westerhof@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Justin,
>
> For me the Xpan is absolutely no gimmick or a JustNiceToHave camera. When
> I could spare the money, I bought a new Xpan II with the 45mm standard lens.
> Within a few weeks later I could get my hands on a hardly used 30mm and
> since that lens is the one I use most. I also have the 90mm to complete the
> set.


   Hi Henck! Thanks for replying.. I was getting worried there.. ;-)

   I'm looking for something new.. I own a Hasselblad 501 c/m, an F5 and a
4x5 camera.. My girlfriend a while back bought me this book on bike racing
(I race bicycles) that was entirely shot with a panoramic camera. The
results were stunning. I think that it would force me to view things
differently which is always good.. But I was concerned that maybe this pano
stuff was a little on the gimmicky side but I am happy to hear you don't
think this is the case.


About printing; After some testing with different methods, now I use a home
> made maskset on my Philips PCS130 enlarger. This is a very unique enlarger
> that uses three halogen light sources (red/green/blue), which you can mix
> stepless with an electronic unit. The enlarger uses small and flat (1mm
> thick) metal plates as masks, so I could make a 24x65 mask very easy. The
> mask is not perfect, but good enough to hold the negatives flat and show the
> complete negative.
> I also scan negatives and slides on an Epson V700 Photo scanner. The Epson
> is able to determine the scanning masks itself, but this won't work for Xpan
> negatives. So I have to mask the negatives manually for the best results.



    Hmm, I'd print traditionally.. This part worries me some. I own a 4x5
enlarger. I guess I'd have to hack something up using a 6x7 neg carrier ?

    Thanks again

    J


-- 
Justin F. Knotzke
jknotzke@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.shampoo.ca

Other related posts: