This discussion reminds me of some of my own experiments with Acufine in
the 70s. I remember getting some very nice results with the old Royal X
120 rated at 4800 and developed in Acufine. It allowed me to shoot
indoor basketball action at a 1/500 shutter speed with my old TLR
Mamiya. The prints
On Saturday, October 20, 2001, at 01:08 PM, Joseph Tainter wrote:
Bill, now I wonder what I have been getting when I request
push-processing. I often shoot NHGII 800 and Supra 800 at 2500 or 3200
with a two stop push (shooting indoors). Often the results are nice,
sometimes not. If I am not
Bill, now I wonder what I have been getting when I request
push-processing. I often shoot NHGII 800 and Supra 800 at 2500
or 3200 with a two stop push (shooting indoors). Often the results are
nice, sometimes not. If I am not getting a two-stop push in the
processing, what am I getting?
Okay, so when I need 1600 or 3200 and have 800 in the bag, should my
strategy be to rate the film at 1600 or 3200, but have it developed
normally? This would save a couple of $$ on processing.
Yep.
Try it. Try some head to head, some pushed, some not.
-Aaron
-
This message is from the
OTOH, if all this is correct (and I assume it is), maybe I'll just try
Fuji's new ISO 1600 and shoot it at 1600.
I've heard, but not tried, that Fuji 800 underexposed one stop and processed
normally gives better results than 1600 shot and processed normally.
Bill, KG4LOV
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Now you guys have really got me wondering... I'm going to be trying this in
the next week or two. I'll let you know how it goes.
Nick
--
From: Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pushing and Pulling film (Question for Bill)
Date: Sun, Oct 21, 2001, 1:08 PM
Yeah, they are that different.
On Sunday 21 October 2001 17:16, Isaac Crawford wrote:
Ken Archer wrote:
I would forget about Diafine if I were you. It always had too soft
a grain for me. Acufine produced sharp grain if not fine grain.
It gives a very pleasing effect by holding shadow
Yes ... but there is so much discussion in many fora that say Acufine,
and other developers, increase the speed of the film. I guess the only
way to test that would be to shoot a subject, like a wall, that has some
texture and some detail, measure the exposure off a grey card to find a
middle
I don't want to stir things (well, maybe I do:), but in my experience,
T-max developer is almost the same as accufine. A hot soup: nothing
more, nothing less.
Paul
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Re: Pushing and Pulling film
Hi Bill
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Isaac Crawford
Subject: Re: Pushing and Pulling film
Also, what about hypering and other tricks astrophoto people
have been
using for years? I seem to recall a technique of letting the
BW film
absorb hydrogen peroxide fumes
Pretty much works for me. .
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Re: Pushing and Pulling film
Yes ... but there is so much discussion in many fora that say
Acufine,
and other developers, increase the speed of the film. I guess
the only
way to test
Push processing C-41 film does not work at all. Anyone who says
otherwise is fooling themselves. The C-41 process is a develop
to completion process, and any additional development merely
adds to the base density.
And yes, I have proven this.
I have heard that E-6 films have better
--
From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pushing and Pulling film
Date: Sat, Oct 20, 2001, 12:08 PM
Push processing C-41 film does not work at all. Anyone who says
otherwise is fooling themselves. The C-41 process is a develop
to completion process
In a message dated 10/20/2001 2:02:24 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Push processing C-41 film does not work at all. Anyone who says
otherwise is fooling themselves. The C-41 process is a develop
to completion process, and any additional development merely
Erm, well... der. Slaps an A-duh sticker on his forehead. So then why is
BW different than c-41? I've also pushed c41 with decent results (read-
grainy as hell), though not nearly as much as bw.
Nick
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pushing and Pulling film
In a message dated 10/20/2001 3:34:36 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Erm, well... der. Slaps an A-duh sticker on his forehead. So then why is
BW different than c-41?
Well, duh, because it isn't C41 chemistry unless you use the chromogenics
like CN or XP2.
I've
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pushing and Pulling film
Date: Sat, Oct 20, 2001, 3:45 PM
Well, duh, because it isn't C41 chemistry unless you use the chromogenics
like CN or XP2.
But is c41 fundamentally different than bw? Not from what I understand
- Original Message -
From: Nicholas Wright
Subject: Re: Pushing and Pulling film
But is c41 fundamentally different than bw? Not from what I
understand.
They both detect light using silver halide crystals (blah,
blah, blah,
excuse me if that is not one hundred percent correct). C41
Hi Bill ...
I agree with you 100%, but I'd like to throw something into this
discussion that's not been mentioned before. We've talked about it
privately, and now seems to be a good time to bring it to the list.
There are some developers, notably Acufine, that allow one to rate an
emulsion at
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Hi Bill ...
I agree with you 100%, but I'd like to throw something into this
discussion that's not been mentioned before. We've talked about it
privately, and now seems to be a good time to bring it to the list.
There are some developers, notably Acufine, that
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Re: Pushing and Pulling film
So, rather than pushing a film one might consider using a
developer
that actually increases a film's speed and range of
usefulness.
However, I don't really understand how this is done - what the
chemical
- Original Message -
From: Ken Archer
Subject: Re: Pushing and Pulling film
I have an 18x30 print of a basketball shot taken in 1975
hanging on my
office wall. It was taken with TriX rated at 1600 and
developed in
Acufine. The grain is fabulous. Sometimes things just don't
get
I would forget about Diafine if I were you. It always had too soft a
grain for me. Acufine produced sharp grain if not fine grain. It
gives a very pleasing effect by holding shadow detail without blocking
the highlights. I have a local source for both if you need one.
On Saturday 20
Hi Bill,
Well, if you can't find any Acufine up in the cold, northern nether
reaches, let me know and I'll send you some. I've got some other stuff
for you as well.
As for your gut reaction that there's no actual speed increase, my
recollection is that that comment runs contrary to what you
Could someone provide a concise and clear explanation on the meaning of
these terms and how you would use them to provide different results?
Thanks,
D
-
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
- Original Message -
From: Delano Mireles [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 12:43 PM
Subject: Pushing and Pulling film
Could someone provide a concise and clear explanation on the
meaning of
these terms and how you would use them to provide
to grasp but it really
comes down to trying to understand how the terms are used.
Thanks again!
D
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 13:21:44 -0600
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pushing and Pulling film
- Original Message -
From
- Original Message -
From: Delano Mireles
Subject: Re: Pushing and Pulling film
Bill,
thanks for the reply! I'm still trying to grasp the terms so
please bear
with me...
Say I have a roll of Ilford Pan F 50 and rate it at 32. Would
I be Pulling
the film at exposure
AHHH! Light bulb just went on.
Thanks, Bill. You've come through again.
Delano
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 13:43:20 -0600
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pushing and Pulling film
- Original Message -
From: Delano
Here's a much simpler way to understand it.
To pull a film is to overexpose it. When a film is overexposed, one
must decrease its development time, or underdevelop it, relative to
the standard development time.
Overexpose + Underdevelop = Pull
To push a film is to underexpose it. When a
30 matches
Mail list logo
