Hey Moira, my experience only extends to hand developing, so not as exact as at a lab. Tri-X for black and white photo prints is rated at 400 ASA, while developing it as a reversal it is rated at 200ASA. I have successfully gained a stop when developing in negative. And three stops when pushing the negative two stops. (1600ASA is not bad for super-8! Got some great shots of wet Paris streets at night illuminated by passing cars). Negative has more latitude than reversal, and I believe this is the same stock as Tri-X 400 PAN photo film. Maybe someone else can chime in if the stock is missing a grey mask necessary for the latitude. But I can’t believe Kodak would dedicate a wide roll of this emulsion only for Super-8 and 16mm In any case, you should be able to get good results for the daylight film too. Remember that negative stocks lose information in the blacks, while reversal stocks lose detail in the bright highlights. I think that developing it as a negative would retain details in the bright parts. There is a lot of writing about this online, google around for other opinions! Pip
> On Sep 28, 2021, at 6:57 AM, ev petrol <epetr...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Hey Pip, > how would that affect the daylight footage? > think i'd be able to get away with it,, if i go for the 400 asa neg option? > > moiratierney.net vimeo.com/moiratierney > > > On Monday, September 27, 2021, 03:49:48 PM GMT+1, FrameWorks Admin > <framewo...@re-voir.com> wrote: > > > Hey Moira, > Since you are editing in digital, why not develop it as a negative? In that > case it should be 400ASA instead of 200, so you gain a stop. > - Pip
-- Frameworks mailing list Frameworks@film-gallery.org https://mail.film-gallery.org/mailman/listinfo/frameworks_film-gallery.org
