Re: Re: B & W recommendations
http://www.digitaltruth.com may have something on that Dave Begin Original Message From: gfen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 16:32:46 -0500 (EST) To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: B & W recommendations > > Anyone have a good HC110 recipie to PULL process Tri-X @iso > 100 (forgot to > > set the film speed). FYI, I asked abou this awhile ago, and everyone gave me a bunch of different suggestions.. I finally went and did it with dilution E at, I think, 8 minutes. It seemed to work well enough, that's for sure. -- http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com <-> photography and portfolio. End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Re: B & W recommendations
> > Anyone have a good HC110 recipie to PULL process Tri-X @iso > 100 (forgot to > > set the film speed). FYI, I asked abou this awhile ago, and everyone gave me a bunch of different suggestions.. I finally went and did it with dilution E at, I think, 8 minutes. It seemed to work well enough, that's for sure. -- http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio.
RE: B & W recommendations
> -Original Message- > From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:pnstenquist@;comcast.net] > > > tom wrote: > > > > I thought I was the only one with any sense ;) > > > > Neopan 1600 (only available in 35mm) > > Of course we were talking about medium format. Well, whoever was talking about Neopan 1600 wasn't... > For which Delta 3200 > still seems to be the best choice for a 1600 film. True. > I don't > like Delta > 3200 in 35mm. I hate it. > I think I'll give that Neopan a try. How do > you process it? XTOL 1:1 75F 5.5m DD-X 65F 6.5m My negs are a little contrasty. You might want to cut 30 seconds off those times. tv
Re: B & W recommendations
tom wrote: > > I thought I was the only one with any sense ;) > > Neopan 1600 (only available in 35mm) Of course we were talking about medium format. For which Delta 3200 still seems to be the best choice for a 1600 film. I don't like Delta 3200 in 35mm. I think I'll give that Neopan a try. How do you process it? Paul
Re: B & W recommendations
I found HC110 too grainy for my tastes and used D76 1:1 for normal work and Acufine 1:1 for speed enhancements. The Tri-X Acufine gave me some of the sharpest negatives from Tri-X than any other developer combination - although there was some grain clumping. For speed, I found the agitation method and rate more important than the developer. 1 minute and 1 inversion dampened the highlights and enhanced the shadow areas. Bob - Original Message - From: "gfen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Bob, > > Do you mean to not use HC110 at all? I actually started out with Sprint > Developer (which they claim is the same as D76 1:1), and moved over to > HC110 because I figured it was more of a "standard" than some little > company's clone-D76. > > I came to this conclusion when realizing that the Sprint times for pushing > film were way out of line with what other people were recommending (ie, to > push Tmax 400 to 1600, I think they recommended like 40 minutes of > development time!). > > >
Re: B & W recommendations
On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Thibault GROUAS wrote: > I would do 5-6 mins depending on contrast with rodinal 1+50 but sorry I > never used HC110. Ilford Perceptol diluted 1+3 is a good one for pull Bill gave me an Xtol reciepe (there must be a catchy word for this I just don't know about, yet), but I'm probably gonna just try and find something "experimental" (or experiment myself) in HC110, as the images aren't important (I take a walk through a 'nature preserve' over lunch, and just like to noodle around with my camera, make it a point to take a roll whenever I go there), I'd just like to try and save them because I did get something I feel would appeal to me. Either way. Oh, in other news, the camera club I joined awhile ago is having a gallery show. Something tells me that not many others will be presenting things to hang, but I think I will anyway. Bought some budget frames and some overmat last night, I just have to find a way to effectivly and cheaply mount the photos to frame.. although, I've noticed as I just played around that sheer pressure works well enough, still have to buy a piece of acid free to lay behind the i mage. I ramble lots...
Re: B & W recommendations
On Wed, 23 Oct 2002, William Robb wrote: > > Anyone have a good HC110 recipie to PULL process Tri-X @iso > 100 (forgot to > > set the film speed). > What speed did you shoot it at? 100. Although, its old, so I'm hoping its natural degradtion combined with the fact that its only 1 2/3rd stop over what I would normally shoot won't cause too much of an issue. I meant to take the time to search the internet for a higher dilution of HC110 that woudl take care of it, but I didn't have a chance before I ran ou yesterday.
Re: B & W recommendations
I shoot Delta 3200 at 1600 as well, but process to Delta's 3200 specs. I've been using it in D-76 straight up but have also had success with T-Max developer. I made some 11x14s of my daughter performing a violin solo that I had shot on Delta 3200 with my 6x7, and they're as fine grained as 35mm tri-x prints with better highlites and shadow detail. It's become one of my favorite films. Paul Glen O'Neal wrote: > > Paul, > > I haven't yet. But I would love to and plan to try it out very soon. I will > let you know how it turns out. I have really been pleased with the results I > get from the Delta 3200 shot at 1600. > > Glen > > -Original Message- > From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:pnstenquist@;comcast.net] > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 1:19 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: B & W recommendations > > I love Delta 3200 in 6x7. Are you shooting those PJ weddings in medium > format? > Paul > > Glen O'Neal wrote: > > > > Stephen > > > > After shooting B&W photojournalistic wedding for 5 years I have settled on > > Ilford Delta 400 Pro for the prep and reception with flash and Ilford > Delta > > 3200 (rated at 1600) for the ceremony without flash. Never been > > disappointed. I am going to start experimenting with the 3200 at the > > reception. No flash, less obtrusive, more candid. > > > > Just my $.02 > > > > Glen O'Neal > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Stephen Hoffman [mailto:stephen.hoffman@;gte.net] > > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 2:23 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: B & W recommendations > > > > I need help in trying out B & W film. I haven't shot any in years and I > > have been asked to shoot some in a wedding soon. Because of the time > factor > > I can't experiment with too many so I'm looking for advice and hopefully I > > can narrow it down to a few. Thanks. > > > > Stephen Hoffman
Re: B & W recommendations
Hi, I found i got much better shots with Neopan 1600 @ 1600 in xtol 1:3, far better than i ever got with Delta 3200. Regards, Paul Jones - Original Message - From: "Glen O'Neal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 2:31 PM Subject: RE: B & W recommendations > Paul, > > I haven't yet. But I would love to and plan to try it out very soon. I will > let you know how it turns out. I have really been pleased with the results I > get from the Delta 3200 shot at 1600. > > Glen > > -Original Message- > From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:pnstenquist@;comcast.net] > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 1:19 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: B & W recommendations > > > I love Delta 3200 in 6x7. Are you shooting those PJ weddings in medium > format? > Paul > > Glen O'Neal wrote: > > > > Stephen > > > > After shooting B&W photojournalistic wedding for 5 years I have settled on > > Ilford Delta 400 Pro for the prep and reception with flash and Ilford > Delta > > 3200 (rated at 1600) for the ceremony without flash. Never been > > disappointed. I am going to start experimenting with the 3200 at the > > reception. No flash, less obtrusive, more candid. > > > > Just my $.02 > > > > Glen O'Neal > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Stephen Hoffman [mailto:stephen.hoffman@;gte.net] > > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 2:23 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: B & W recommendations > > > > I need help in trying out B & W film. I haven't shot any in years and I > > have been asked to shoot some in a wedding soon. Because of the time > factor > > I can't experiment with too many so I'm looking for advice and hopefully I > > can narrow it down to a few. Thanks. > > > > Stephen Hoffman >
RE: B & W recommendations
Paul, I haven't yet. But I would love to and plan to try it out very soon. I will let you know how it turns out. I have really been pleased with the results I get from the Delta 3200 shot at 1600. Glen -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:pnstenquist@;comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 1:19 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: B & W recommendations I love Delta 3200 in 6x7. Are you shooting those PJ weddings in medium format? Paul Glen O'Neal wrote: > > Stephen > > After shooting B&W photojournalistic wedding for 5 years I have settled on > Ilford Delta 400 Pro for the prep and reception with flash and Ilford Delta > 3200 (rated at 1600) for the ceremony without flash. Never been > disappointed. I am going to start experimenting with the 3200 at the > reception. No flash, less obtrusive, more candid. > > Just my $.02 > > Glen O'Neal > > -Original Message- > From: Stephen Hoffman [mailto:stephen.hoffman@;gte.net] > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 2:23 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: B & W recommendations > > I need help in trying out B & W film. I haven't shot any in years and I > have been asked to shoot some in a wedding soon. Because of the time factor > I can't experiment with too many so I'm looking for advice and hopefully I > can narrow it down to a few. Thanks. > > Stephen Hoffman
Re: B & W recommendations
I can't offer much other than HC110 (any dilution) would be my last recommendation. I personally would probably use X-tol 1:1 and follow Kodak's recommendation of 8 min and 20C (recommended for EI of 100-200) Bob « gfen » <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote : > On Wed, 23 Oct 2002, Thibault GROUAS wrote: >> You may also want to push process tri-x which gives some good results quite > > Anyone have a good HC110 recipie to PULL process Tri-X @iso 100 (forgot to > set the film speed). >
Re: B & W recommendations
I love Delta 3200 in 6x7. Are you shooting those PJ weddings in medium format? Paul Glen O'Neal wrote: > > Stephen > > After shooting B&W photojournalistic wedding for 5 years I have settled on > Ilford Delta 400 Pro for the prep and reception with flash and Ilford Delta > 3200 (rated at 1600) for the ceremony without flash. Never been > disappointed. I am going to start experimenting with the 3200 at the > reception. No flash, less obtrusive, more candid. > > Just my $.02 > > Glen O'Neal > > -Original Message- > From: Stephen Hoffman [mailto:stephen.hoffman@;gte.net] > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 2:23 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: B & W recommendations > > I need help in trying out B & W film. I haven't shot any in years and I > have been asked to shoot some in a wedding soon. Because of the time factor > I can't experiment with too many so I'm looking for advice and hopefully I > can narrow it down to a few. Thanks. > > Stephen Hoffman
Re: B & W recommendations
- Original Message - From: gfen Subject: Re: B & W recommendations > Anyone have a good HC110 recipie to PULL process Tri-X @iso 100 (forgot to > set the film speed). Doh! I should learn to read. Ummm, Dilution E, at 20ºC for 8 minutes should do it. William Robb > >
Re: B & W recommendations
I would do 5-6 mins depending on contrast with rodinal 1+50 but sorry I never used HC110. Ilford Perceptol diluted 1+3 is a good one for pull processing also. « gfen » <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote : > On Wed, 23 Oct 2002, Thibault GROUAS wrote: >> You may also want to push process tri-x which gives some good results quite > > Anyone have a good HC110 recipie to PULL process Tri-X @iso 100 (forgot to > set the film speed). >
Re: B & W recommendations
- Original Message - From: gfen Subject: Re: B & W recommendations > Anyone have a good HC110 recipie to PULL process Tri-X @iso 100 (forgot to > set the film speed). > > What speed did you shoot it at? William Robb
Re: B & W recommendations
On Wed, 23 Oct 2002, Thibault GROUAS wrote: > You may also want to push process tri-x which gives some good results quite Anyone have a good HC110 recipie to PULL process Tri-X @iso 100 (forgot to set the film speed).
Re: B & W recommendations
Hello Steffen, You may want to try out Kodak Tri-X developped in Rodinal. Both products haven't changed since decades (Rodinal is more than a century old now) so this is the "traditionnal B&W" combo, but it gives very pleasing results for my tastes, especially out of focus portions of the image render very nicely. Tri-X is kodak's marvellous B&W film with an awesome grain. If you develop it in a fine grain developper (most of the developpers sold today) the emulsion grain will be mixed and finally won't be so nice and visible. On the counterpart, Agfa's Rodinal is a chemical that doesn't change the grain appearance, leaving it as it is on the film. While Pan F in Rodinal gives extremly fine grain, TMZ gives enormous grain. It is also know for its extreme acutance, which is visual sharpness (and not resolution). It also provide awesome mid-tones when diluted 1:75 and more. My recipe for contrasty scenes is 1:100 dilution for 20-25 minutes at 20°C, with little agitation. When contrast needs a little boost I go for 1:75 at about 14-16 minutes. I expose the film around ISO 250/320 when I can. You may also want to push process tri-x which gives some good results quite easily. Emofin is a 2 bath developper by Tetenal, very simple and easy to use (no dilution, you can use the stock for 6 months). I use to expose my tri-x rolls at 800 (dev about 7 mins), 1600 (dev about 10-12 mins), and even 3200 (dev about 18-20 mins) and get nice results. Don't forget that dev times mostly depends on the contrast you had when shooting (if contrast was really high, you will loose midtones with a long development). Actually I mostly shot B&W, in fact tri-x is what I shoot 95% of the time. After about a hundred tri-x rolls in emofin, i'am now experimenting with Rodinal, and it's nice ! In my darkroom I use mostly agfa chemicals too...especially Neutol NE & WA as paper dev. And Bergger warmtone fiber papers. I'am sick of Ilford for now... Good luck for the wedding ! Thibault Grouas « Stephen Hoffman » <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote : > I need help in trying out B & W film. I haven't shot any in years and I > have been asked to shoot some in a wedding soon. Because of the time factor > I can't experiment with too many so I'm looking for advice and hopefully I > can narrow it down to a few. Thanks. > > Stephen Hoffman >
Re: B & W recommendations
On Wed, 23 Oct 2002, Stephen Hoffman wrote: > I need help in trying out B & W film. I haven't shot any in years and I > have been asked to shoot some in a wedding soon. Because of the time factor > I can't experiment with too many so I'm looking for advice and hopefully I > can narrow it down to a few. Thanks. Tri-X, rate it at ISO320 and enjoy.
Re: B & W recommendations
I started shooting Agfa APX 100 about a year ago (it's pretty popular in Germany) and quite like it... Norm Stephen Hoffman wrote: I need help in trying out B & W film. I haven't shot any in years and I have been asked to shoot some in a wedding soon. Because of the time factor I can't experiment with too many so I'm looking for advice and hopefully I can narrow it down to a few. Thanks. Stephen Hoffman
