oks like the APX emulsion on the Foma Classic Pan base. As to
Rollei Classic, I've heard it's APX master rolls as well as Maco current
production based on the APX emulsion.
>For film recommendations, my gigantic freezer stock is mainly three
>films:
>
>Fuji NPZ 800 -- I se
On Jul 6, 2006, at 3:35 PM, Adam Maas wrote:
> (the confusion as to the Silvertone and
> Rollei Classic origin with respect to APX increases every day).
Really? What do you need to know about it?
For film recommendations, my gigantic freezer stock is mainly three
films:
Fuji NPZ 80
Back when I still shot film I had settled on Kodak's Portra UC. It
was touted to have been developed to scan well. My experience with
the color was very good. It was one of the few films that did a good
job on both skin tones and vivid colors.
The brighter colors were well saturated, but not to
On Thu, 6 Jul 2006, Adam Maas wrote:
> Yep, that's almost velvia-ish saturation from the Ultra Color. I don't
> touch the stuff, if I want ungodly saturation, I shoot E100VS or Velvia
> chromes.
I'm lazy, and chromes require extra work for my little amatuer self.
I'm gonna have to pick me up a
gfen wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Jul 2006, Adam Maas wrote:
>
>>Plus-X is still available, but can be hard to find. Tri-X will likely
>>outlast every other Kodak B&W film. Tri-X is my do-everything film, I
>>shoot it from EI 200-6400 on a regular basis.
>
>
> I knew they killed it in sheet format a few
Hi,
I don't find the colors clowny or offensive in the Ultra Color
linethey just seem to pop without rendering skin tones
offensivelygreat for shooting photos of family/friends outside.
I like it.
Robert
gfen wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Jul 2006, Adam Maas wrote:
>
>> Plus-X is still avai
On Thu, 6 Jul 2006, Adam Maas wrote:
> Plus-X is still available, but can be hard to find. Tri-X will likely
> outlast every other Kodak B&W film. Tri-X is my do-everything film, I
> shoot it from EI 200-6400 on a regular basis.
I knew they killed it in sheet format a few years back, I assumed r
On Jul 6, 2006, at 12:33 PM, Steve Sharpe wrote:
> At 2:59 PM -0400 7/6/06, gfen wrote:
>> On Thu, 6 Jul 2006, Adam Maas wrote:
>>> Fuji Acros, Kodak Tri-X, Ilford PanF+.
>>
>> I'm a little out of touch, as I've been living off of frozen
>> stockpiles in
>> 35mm film and don't really shoot it o
Mike,
Fuji Reala (100)
Fuji 160S (160)--formerly NPS
Fuji 400H (400)--formerly NPH
Kodak High Definition 200 or 400
Kodak Ultra 100 or 400
Kodak Portra 160NC, 160VC, 400NC, 400VC
Kodak Portra UC400
Kodak color process 400 Black and White
Kodak Tri-X Pan 400
The choices are narrowing. I usually
At 2:59 PM -0400 7/6/06, gfen wrote:
>On Thu, 6 Jul 2006, Adam Maas wrote:
>> Fuji Acros, Kodak Tri-X, Ilford PanF+.
>
>I'm a little out of touch, as I've been living off of frozen stockpiles in
>35mm film and don't really shoot it often anymore.
>
>In B&W, from Kodak, I used Tri X for high speed
gfen wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Jul 2006, Adam Maas wrote:
>
>>Fuji Acros, Kodak Tri-X, Ilford PanF+.
>
>
> I'm a little out of touch, as I've been living off of frozen stockpiles in
> 35mm film and don't really shoot it often anymore.
>
> In B&W, from Kodak, I used Tri X for high speed and Plus X for
July 2006 19:03
> To: pdml@pdml.net
> Subject: Film recommendations?
>
> Now that I have a scanner capable of good film scans, I'd
> like to begin
> shooting more film. I've mostly used Fujifilm Superia
> 200/400 because it
> was about the only film available to me,
On Thu, 6 Jul 2006, Adam Maas wrote:
> Fuji Acros, Kodak Tri-X, Ilford PanF+.
I'm a little out of touch, as I've been living off of frozen stockpiles in
35mm film and don't really shoot it often anymore.
In B&W, from Kodak, I used Tri X for high speed and Plus X for low speed
film. I'm unsure i
Fuji Acros, Kodak Tri-X, Ilford PanF+.
Way cheaper to develop than any colour film. Of ocurse, you will end up
having to do it yourself ;-)
If you need to run it through a minilab, go with Ilford XP2
-Adam
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Now that I have a scanner capable of good film scans, I'd li
Fuji Reala..or Superia. 100 ISO!
Jack
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Now that I have a scanner capable of good film scans, I'd like to
> begin
> shooting more film. I've mostly used Fujifilm Superia 200/400
> because it
> was about the only film available to me, aside from some Kodak. Any
> su
Hello mike,
You didn't tell use what kind of subjects. There are many types of
films designed for specific uses. High or low contrast, punchy color
or subtle color, good skin tones for example.
I used several different films when I was shooting the stuff. For
people shots either Kodak Portra o
It's been four years since I shot any film. If you're going to shoot
traditional process B&W film, process it yourself to provide the best
possible negatives for scanning and reduce costs.
My favorite B&W films as of the last of my 35mm shooting are
Agfa APX25 (EI 50 in XTOL 1:1) *
Kod
If you can get it, my all around favorite color negative film is Fuji Reala.
http://fujifilm.com/products/consumer_film/superia_reala.html
Tom C.
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: pdml@pdml.net
>Subject: Film recommendations?
>Date: Thu, 6
Now that I have a scanner capable of good film scans, I'd like to begin
shooting more film. I've mostly used Fujifilm Superia 200/400 because it
was about the only film available to me, aside from some Kodak. Any
suggestions for some good 35mm film? I prefer negative film because slide
film is e
; To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2002 4:58 AM
> Subject: Re: Delta 3200; was: Fast film recommendations?
>
> > I bought a roll of Verichrome Pan the other day. Didn't know they still
> > made it, but I guess it's available in 120. I did
t: Re: Delta 3200; was: Fast film recommendations?
> I bought a roll of Verichrome Pan the other day. Didn't know they still
> made it, but I guess it's available in 120. I did a model shoot today,
> but stuck with my Plus-X. Perhaps I'll try the Verichrome Pan tomorro
I bought a roll of Verichrome Pan the other day. Didn't know they still
made it, but I guess it's available in 120. I did a model shoot today,
but stuck with my Plus-X. Perhaps I'll try the Verichrome Pan tomorrow.
I'm not sure if XX is available in the US. Haven't seen it in a long
time. Royal X
t> HP5+? I've developed it in everything...it just doesn't like me
I would say, stick with your favourite and use only it ;) If HP
doesn't work for you, you could spend years tuning it when your
already nice TX works nicely for you. It's only those "darkroom
freaks" who spend more time in the
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Frantisek Vlcek
>
> I said:
> t> I can't get Delta 3200 to look decent above ISO 1250,
> and HP5+ looks like crap under every
> t> circumstance.
>
> Tom, what do you develop it in? I have had excellent
t> I can't get Delta 3200 to look decent above ISO 1250, and HP5+ looks like crap
under every
t> circumstance.
Tom, what do you develop it in? I have had excellent results with HP5+ in
Microphen, sometimes even up to 3200. Quite small grain, good
tonality. Especially at 1600 it looks nice to me.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of William Robb
>
> - Original Message -
> From: tom
> >
> > I used to think the same thing about my lab until I saw one of
> their display
> > prints start to turn a funky color.
>
> Define "funky
On Thursday, April 18, 2002, at 10:07 AM, tom wrote:
> I'm not sure how they process stuff, but I've gotten a bit uptight about
> processing since I saw that. I know they're very careful in general, and
> take pride in their work.
>
> I always use a 2 bath fix, selenium toning and air-drying.
Y
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Aaron Reynolds
> Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 9:30 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Re[5]: Delta 3200; was: Fast film recommendations?
>
>
> On Thursday, April
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> Quoth Tom:
> > Don't most labs suck when it comes to b+w? It seem to me the world is
> > set up for color proofs.
>
> "Most"? I dunno. Maybe. Fortunately I've found at lea
On Wednesday, April 17, 2002, at 05:37 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
> On the other hand, I've had good luck using both developers with Delta
> 3200, although my experience with that film is limited. Here's a shot
> exposed at 1600 and developed in T-Max as though it was exposed at
> 3200: http://h
Paul Stenquist observed:
> My experience with Delta 3200 has been the opposite. I've found it to
> relatively fine grained and less contrasty than the Kodak TMZ 3200.
Interestingly, I've found these two films pretty much
interchangeable. Either that says something about how
I'm getting th
Quoth Tom:
> Don't most labs suck when it comes to b+w? It seem to me the world is
> set up for color proofs.
"Most"? I dunno. Maybe. Fortunately I've found at least one
that seriously Fails To Suck at black and white. I guess I've
been lucky.
On the other hand, I've had good luck using both developers with Delta
3200, although my experience with that film is limited. Here's a shot
exposed at 1600 and developed in T-Max as though it was exposed at 3200:
http://home.earthlink.net/~pnstenquist/_uimages/amyl2.jpg
The shot I posted yesterd
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 12:53:24 -0700, Bruce Dayton wrote:
>Tom,
>
>Do it myself because of fire hazard or type of developer they are
>using? Unfortunately, I am not currently equipped to do it myself.
We're talking $50 for all the stuff you would need.
>Not sure if I want to become equipped. I a
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 16:01:07 -0400, Aaron Reynolds wrote:
>On Wednesday, April 17, 2002, at 03:39 PM, tom wrote:
>>
>>This means the film didn't catch fire and no one died.
>
>Tom, I get the impression that your local lab really sucks. ;)
Don't most labs suck when it comes to b+w? It seem to me
On Wednesday, April 17, 2002, at 03:39 PM, tom wrote:
>
> This means the film didn't catch fire and no one died.
Tom, I get the impression that your local lab really sucks. ;)
-Aaron
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the
On Wednesday, April 17, 2002, at 03:23 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote:
> Thanks for the tips. I just talked to my lab and they said that they
> use Kodak HC110 Dilution B for developer. Have you heard of any
> problems with this and the Delta 3200? They said they have done some
> rolls and it seemed
Tom,
Do it myself because of fire hazard or type of developer they are
using? Unfortunately, I am not currently equipped to do it myself.
Not sure if I want to become equipped. I am not much of a B&W shooter
(yet). This is to be more experimental in nature.
In shooting the three speeds, would
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 12:23:22 -0700, Bruce Dayton wrote:
>Aaron,
>
>Thanks for the tips. I just talked to my lab and they said that they
>use Kodak HC110 Dilution B for developer. Have you heard of any
>problems with this and the Delta 3200? They said they have done some
>rolls and it seemed jus
Aaron,
Thanks for the tips. I just talked to my lab and they said that they
use Kodak HC110 Dilution B for developer. Have you heard of any
problems with this and the Delta 3200? They said they have done some
rolls and it seemed just fine.
Also, what speed would you rate it at for a starting
On Wednesday, April 17, 2002, at 11:26 AM, Bruce Dayton wrote:
> My local lab (I really like them) did some Agfa APX 400 that was just
> horrible. I think they mostly do the Kodak films. I'm going to ask
> them about the Ilford 3200, as I would like to try some high speed B&W
> in the 67 and t
Thanks all for the explanations, I knew the problem was the lab I went
to didn't know or cared about this particular filmI guess I can
develop it myself or look for a more competent lab.
Ciao, Flavio
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.n
Flavio,
I have used Delta 3200 many times and I have always had Ilford
do the processing (discount envelopes).
I have not had large grain (in fact the opposite) and I have been very
pleased with the contrast.
But then if Ilford don't get it right, then there's not much chance for us
is th
Yes ... Ilford recommends DD-X, and it can produce stunning results.
Grain at many EIs is no worse than TX. However, you've got to determine
what speeds work best for you and the subjects you're photographing.
Flavio Minelli wrote:
> I've tried it a couple of times and I've been scared away fo
David Brooks wrote:
>
> Aaron and I like the Ilford Delta 3200 B&W film.I
> recently tried Supra 800 and found it nice.
>
> ...
Dave and Aaron, about Delta 3200.
I've tried it a couple of times and I've been scared away form it by the
huge garin size and the excessive contrast. How do labs mana
On Monday, April 15, 2002, at 12:55 PM, Paris, Leonard wrote:
> We must operate in a complete vacuum here. This is probably one of the
> most
> discussed subjects on the PDML.
We need an FAQ. ;)
For the record, in colour I recommend Fuji Press 800/Superia 800 for
available light with a litt
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
>
> ----
>
>* Fast film recommendations?, steven gilson
>
al Message-
From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2002 10:15 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Fast film recommendations?
Feeling a bit cranky this morning, Len?
"Paris, Leonard" wrote:
> We must operate in a complete vacuum here. This is p
Feeling a bit cranky this morning, Len?
"Paris, Leonard" wrote:
> We must operate in a complete vacuum here. This is probably one of the most
> discussed subjects on the PDML. I guess nobody ever reads the list but just
> pops a question right in when they need to know something. I guess it's
Aaron and I like the Ilford Delta 3200 B&W film.I
recently tried Supra 800 and found it nice.
Dave
Begin Original Message
From: "steven gilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 11:41:50 -0500
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Fast film recom
Depends on the light.
Here are the choices as I see them:
Tri-X, Neopan 400, or Ilford's HP5+, Fuji Neopan 1600 exposed at 800 or
Ilford's Delta 3200 exposed at around 1200.
A lot depends on the light in which you're shooting. Pushing 400 film
in artificial light might not be such a good ide
-Original Message-
From: steven gilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2002 11:42 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Fast film recommendations?
I need recommendations for relatively fast print films for taking available
room light shots of a baby & mother. Both
I need recommendations for relatively fast print films for taking available room light
shots of a baby & mother. Both b&w and color, either 800 or a pushable 400.
Thanks in advance,
Steven.
--
___
Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Ema
Rob B. wrote:
>> Everybody now - REALA!! There is simply no comparison - the velvia of
>> the print world!
R E A L A
Great film. One of the best.
--Mike
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't
54 matches
Mail list logo
