Didn't most wedding pros expose Vericolor VPS 160 at 120?
Part of the stated ISO is a marketing game that does not precisely
correlate to the ISO density tests. label it conservatively (call an 800
film 640), and you can promote it as a film that is more tolerant of
underexposure. Lable it liberally (call an 800-speed film a 1000), and you
can sell more to users who won't figure out it's the film's fault when
their slightly dark prints come back.
If you are Kodak, and you develop an emulsion that was intended to sell as
a 200 amateur film but that tests out as a ISO 180, you're not going to
market it as an ISO 180 film. The stockers at Wall Mart wouldn't know which
bin to put it in.
Does anyone really know what the ISO value of the original GOLD Max was? I
think I read 640. ith that film, as I recall, Kodak did not even print the
ISO on the box. However, the DX holes set the camera to ISO 800. Kodak
relied on the film's high contrast to handle underexposure.
William Robb wrote:
I really don't think I know enough to tell Kodak or Fuji that
their emulsion designers don't know what they are doing.
William Robb
Paul Franklin Stregevsky
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
