I always preferred FP4 over Plus-X, from memory because Plus-X in Microdol-X
was fine-grained but
slightly 'mushy', whereas FP4 in Acutol was slightly grainier but had better
contrast and much
better acutance (as you might expect).
John Coyle
Brisbane, Australia
-Original Message
over Plus-X, from memory because Plus-X in Microdol-X
was fine-grained but
slightly 'mushy', whereas FP4 in Acutol was slightly grainier but had better
contrast and much
better acutance (as you might expect).
John Coyle
Brisbane, Australia
-Original Message-
From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun
I think it is a matter a personal preference. At one time in the past I
bought a couple of pro-packs of FP4 and worked my way through them,
probably using D76 or and Rodinal, but I did not take a shine to it and
went back to Plus-X. I found the FP4 to have less grain than Plus-X, but
more than
A little while ago the topic of Plus-X film came up. I just stumbled
into this:
http://www.ultrafineonline.com/kopl125bwfi3.html
At $6.98 per roll it is a bit too pricey for me (I have a dozen roll in
the freezer already) but if anyone wants to get some it seems like they
have
I know there is some disagreement about this, but in my experience
Ilford FP-4 Plus is comparable to Kodak Plus X with a couple of
exceptions. The important one being that FP-4 seems to look sharper, oh
yes, and it's also still manufactured. I used to buy FP-4 because it was
less expensive
2 Plus-X, dated 02/04, refrigerated.
$30 each, includes shipping in US.
(more for shpg overseas)
Collin
I have used Edwal film developer with Plus-x. Results were very good as I
remember.
Brendan MacRae
-
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 .
from memory i got good results with Plus-X in tetinal neofin blue
- Original Message -
From: David Chang-Sang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 10:08 AM
Subject: OT: Plus-X Users ?
Quickie for Plus-X users out there:
I just developed 2 rolls of Plus
I never use T-Max with Plus X. I generally use D-76 1:1 at 68 degrees
for 7 minutes. I'm very happy with the results. My PUG submission for
this month was shot on Plus-X and processed in that manner. I do use
T-Max for TMZ 3200 and sometimes for Ilford 3200 as well. It seems to be
good for high
As often quoted, there is nothing signifricantly better or easier to use
than D76 1:1
Bob Rapp
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: David Chang-Sang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 10:08 AM
Subject: OT: Plus-X Users ?
Quickie for Plus-X
On Thursday, May 2, 2002, at 12:56 PM, Evan Hanson wrote:
Aaron you're a genius the words I was looking for but couldn't
find are my base isn't clear enough. What causes that?
Overdevelopment of some kind. How is your agitation? Are you
aggressive at all? Are you precise with dilution
My answers interspersed below.
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
Overdevelopment of some kind. How is your agitation? Are you
aggressive at all? Are you precise with dilution and temperature? If
you're already pretty relaxed when agitating, and your temperature is
bang on, I'd suggest shaving 10%
On Friday, May 3, 2002, at 12:11 PM, tom wrote:
One flip is about 1 or 1.5 seconds of agitation, amounting to 2 or 3
secs of agitation per minute. I've never seen a recommendation for
less than 5 secs of agitation per minute unless you're doing something
weird like stand developing.
Sure
I don't recommend a pre soak. It has, for me, upset the development
time and i could never get consistent results. It has been said that
when the film has received a pre soak, uptake of developer may not be
consistent.
I'd like to get some comments regarding consistent, or inconsistent,
I never heard of that one before, now I have several things to
try this weekend. Just like I tell my kids you learn something
new everyday.
Evan
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
Sure you have, you just saw me recommend it! ;)
Pre-soak is a good tip that I forgot to throw in. Evan, definitely
On Friday, May 3, 2002, at 10:26 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I don't recommend a pre soak. It has, for me, upset the development
time and i could never get consistent results. It has been said that
when the film has received a pre soak, uptake of developer may not be
consistent.
I have
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Shel Belinkoff
I don't recommend a pre soak. It has, for me, upset the development
time and i could never get consistent results. It has been
said that
when the film has received a pre soak,
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Aaron Reynolds
On Friday, May 3, 2002, at 12:11 PM, tom wrote:
One flip is about 1 or 1.5 seconds of agitation,
amounting to 2 or 3
secs of agitation per minute. I've never seen a recommendation
On Friday, May 3, 2002, at 03:12 PM, tom wrote:
Yeah, but you use a Jobo and agitate constantly!
I do now, and I also recognize that many developers are worthless in the
Jobo for precisely that reason. I love Rodinal in hand tanks. I hate
Rodinal in the Jobo.
-Aaron
-
This message is
My experience is that I was unable to get consistent results. I'd soak
the film for X minutes, develop, and get a result. If it were
satisfactory, I'd try it again, but the results would be different. It
just didn't work for me. Maybe I didn't find the magic combination of
pre soak time and
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Aaron Reynolds
On Friday, May 3, 2002, at 03:12 PM, tom wrote:
Yeah, but you use a Jobo and agitate constantly!
I do now, and I also recognize that many developers are
worthless in the
Jobo for
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Shel Belinkoff
My experience is that I was unable to get consistent
results. I'd soak
the film for X minutes, develop, and get a result. If it were
satisfactory, I'd try it again, but the results
Ok guys sorry about yesterday but it appears my mail server
crapped out on me resulting in me being unsubscribed. Here is my
question again.
Feeling comfortable enough now to start experimenting in the
darkroom, can anyone recommend alternate chemicals and/or
dilutions for Tri-X and Plus-X. FYI
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Evan Hanson
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 10:04 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: REPOST:Best Soup for Tri-X Plus-X
Ok guys sorry about yesterday but it appears my mail server
crapped out on me
Shel and Aaron inquired about by current chemistry. But I am
going to try XTOL.
Evan
Then you saw our responses? Why are you asking again?
tv
-
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
On Thursday, May 2, 2002, at 10:37 AM, tom wrote:
Then you saw our responses? Why are you asking again?
Well, I for one asked what he was using now, and that info has been
added to his repost.
Ok, so, Evan, how do your negs look right now? How clear is the base?
How heavy is the
HC-110 gives some very nice blacks with Plus-X.
Haven't used it with Tri-X as yet.
--
Collin Brendemuehl, KC8TKA
---
Get over it.
Dr. Laura
--
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions
A film developer doesn't deliver nice blacks - that's a result of
paper choice and developer. However, perhaps you should define what
nice blacks are so we can be sure we're thinking of the same thing.
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
HC-110 gives some very nice blacks with Plus-X.
Haven't used
. However, perhaps you should define what
nice blacks are so we can be sure we're thinking of the
same thing.
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
HC-110 gives some very nice blacks with Plus-X.
Haven't used it with Tri-X as yet.
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.earthlink.net
Aaron you're a genius the words I was looking for but couldn't
find are my base isn't clear enough. What causes that?
Highlights are ok but I would like to pull more detail from the
shadows. I know it's there because when I spring for the pro-lab
shadow areas have show their details better.
On Wednesday, May 1, 2002, at 08:57 AM, Evan Hanson wrote:
Feeling comfortable enough now to start experimenting in the
darkroom, can anyone recommend alternate chemicals and/or
dilutions for Tri-X and Plus-X.
What are you using now, and what do you like and dislike about it?
Don't wanna
:1 dilution and go from there.
Evan Hanson wrote:
Feeling comfortable enough now to start experimenting in the
darkroom, can anyone recommend alternate chemicals and/or
dilutions for Tri-X and Plus-X.
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/
When
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Evan Hanson
Feeling comfortable enough now to start experimenting in the
darkroom, can anyone recommend alternate chemicals and/or
dilutions for Tri-X and Plus-X.
D-76 is the standard, but I find
I just happen to have a roll of Plus-X that I have to develop; and after last weekends
discussion of getting my own gear I was hoping to jet out to see the OLPFG (Our
Local Professional Film Guy) Aaron.
Aaron, what are you hours this coming weekend ? :)
Cheers,
Dave
On Wednesday, May 1
Plus-X is quite good in Neofin-Blue(sp?)
Cya
- Original Message -
From: Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 11:44 PM
Subject: Re: Best Soup for Tri-X Plus-X
On Wednesday, May 1, 2002, at 08:57 AM, Evan Hanson wrote:
Feeling
Don't see any mention of sheet film sizes, though.
Original Message
Subject: Plus-X, the true story
Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 15:12:07 -0500
From: Bob Shell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OK gang, here it is straight from the horse's mouth.
I'm very sorry for the confusion. That March 15
On Wednesday, April 3, 2002, at 01:30 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Don't see any mention of sheet film sizes, though.
According to my rep over here, sheet film Plus-X has ALREADY been
discontinued. Otherwise, his story matches yours.
-Aaron
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List
William Robb wrote:
My favourite kitchen knife was made in Brazil,
May be Tramontina?
Very common and praised here in South America.
Albano
-
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
Hey Guys(Girls),
Has anyone picked up some of the IMP or USA Kodak film from BH? Do they
match the USAR? Has anyone had a problem? I shouldn't think so, but my
paranoid mind has led me to ask.
Any comments greatly appreciated.
l8r,
Douglas E Harmon
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Doug,
I've purchased some imported Tri-X from a local lab here. I've not
noticed any difference between that and the regular Tri-X I've been
buying from various sources. What's USAR film? What's USA film?
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have a very rare photograph - a picture
PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 10:11 PM
Subject: Re: Speaking of Tri-X and Plus-X. Is IMP and USA from BH safe?
: Hi Doug,
:
: I've purchased some imported Tri-X from a local lab here. I've not
: noticed any difference between that and the regular Tri-X I've been
:
Subj: Re: Speaking of Tri-X and Plus-X. Is IMP and USA from BH safe?
Date: 5/14/01 9:14:15 PM Central Daylight Time
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Shel Belinkoff)
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Doug,
I've purchased some imported Tri-X from a local lab
- Original Message -
From: Douglas E Harmon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: May 14, 2001 7:42 PM
Subject: Speaking of Tri-X and Plus-X. Is IMP and USA from BH
safe?
Hey Guys(Girls),
Has anyone picked up some of the IMP or USA Kodak film
from BH? Do they
match
Hi Shel,
I think the R means refrigerated. But if you go to BH's website and
click on Film, a mini- window will open up, in addition to main window,
and explain it. Whether or not there is a visible difference between the
different types, I don't know. The price difference can be quite
I believe USAR stands for USA, Rochester, NY. It indicates
that the film is made and distributed in the US by Kodak.
USA is made in the US and distributed elsewhere and
reimported by the vendor. And, IMP means it is made in an
overseas plant and imported by the vendor.
--Tom
Shel Belinkoff
Per the inquiries from Shel WW: In the Plus-X work I've done, development
was with the standard Kodak chemicals and by the book. That produces some
nice fine grain but also some low contrast. I'd like to improve that contrast
characteristic with same exposure setting. Normally I rated
HC110 is an adjustable, but usually quite high contrast, developer. I used it years
ago for astrophography- with Plus-X.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 04/12 1:47 PM
Per the inquiries from Shel WW: In the Plus-X work I've done, development
was with the standard Kodak chemicals and by the book
and
paper grade are you using? What paper developer are you using?
What time/temp are you using to make the prints?
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
There are no rules for good photographs,
there are only good photographs.
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
Per the inquiries from Shel WW: In
These were negs from 25 years ago. The developer was D-76, dilution unknown.
The paper was Kodak's RCII. I've just reprinted some of them on RCIII.
It appears that I should spend some time to (re)learn darkroom techniques.
Thanks,
Collin
From: Shel Belinkoff
Plus-X is not the same film it was 25 years ago, either. I
found that out by taking a few years off from the darkroom in
the early 1980s. When I went back to it, everything had changed,
and none of the old techniques worked the same.
What you described in your previous post sounds like
50 matches
Mail list logo
