Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,557   Posts: 1,545,226   Online: 898
      
Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 102
  1. #81
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,893
    Well tungsten was always rare in neg film because you can correct the color balance easily enough in printing. And once scanning became the typical fate of transparency film, that was true for it as well only more so.

    E64T was actually popular to use outdoors in daylight with suitable filtering because it gave lower contrast than daylight films, so that may have accounted for continued sales and thus the film lasting longer on the market.

  2. #82
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,032
    Images
    65
    See the Ctein examples of Tungsten correction during printing. They are pretty poor. The speeds are so far apart that correction causes severe crossover.

    PE

  3. #83
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,337
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by nateo200 View Post
    Wow everyone is freaking out about this film in one way or another! haha I'm just happy their is a choice for Tungsten film left....I never understood the point of having this massive selection of high speed daylight film but no highspeed tungsten! Like why did Kodak get rid of Ektachrome 320T, Ektachrome 160T and leave us with Ektachrome 64T until like '09-ish?! Anyways I cant wait to try this, unfortunetly my 35mm(s) are broken....Maybe I should suggest they get some 65mm 500T stock and spool it onto 120 with a paper back I would really enjoy that!
    65mm isn't 120, 120 is 60mm (or like 60.546456434 or something stupid) so it would need to be re-slit, not really worth the cost.

    You'd be better off using it for a 70mm back without the perforations...
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  4. #84
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,893

    New fast (800) Tungsten balanced film called Cinestill

    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    See the Ctein examples of Tungsten correction during printing. They are pretty poor. The speeds are so far apart that correction causes severe crossover.

    PE
    Interesting - I never had a problem getting a print I liked from daylight color neg shot under tungsten, but my standards are undoubtedly a lot lower; I'm not really joking either as my ability to judge B&W density and contrast is far more developed and sensitive than my color judgement. Plus, such photos are often available light anyway such that getting "close enough" still makes for an aesthetically pleasing image, or at least for me.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  5. #85
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,032
    Images
    65
    Well Roger, the examples did not use color correction filters. If you correct, then the prints look normal.

    I think that Ctein devotes an entire chapter to this in "Post Exposure" which is free as a download now IIRC.

    PE

  6. #86
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,893
    Yeah I have the download, will have to look up that section, thanks.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  7. #87

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    168
    How are they getting such good results with the rem-jet removed?

  8. #88

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    111
    I just got a roll of this today. Those that have shot this film, how many stops have you pushed it successfully? The canister has a 3 stop check box but I can't possibly imagine getting 6400. At least not with traditional C41 chemistry.

  9. #89

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    MA, USA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,251
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by fotoobscura View Post
    I just got a roll of this today. Those that have shot this film, how many stops have you pushed it successfully? The canister has a 3 stop check box but I can't possibly imagine getting 6400. At least not with traditional C41 chemistry.
    why not?
    CatLABS of JP
    Darkroom resources and service

    www.catlabs.info | https://www.facebook.com/CatLABS.of.JP | www.jobo-usa.com

  10. #90

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    MA, USA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,251
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    I never had a problem getting a print I liked from daylight color neg shot under tungsten, but my standards are undoubtedly a lot lower
    I have never seen anything like this that was close to "correct". Using a correcting filter during shooting is very easy, and even then, with perfect matching, and very stable power sources, results vary, as light bulbs change temperature and color temperature very fast and over time. Correcting those shifts in prints causes a cross over pretty much right away, no matter what you do. color paper is very limited that way.
    CatLABS of JP
    Darkroom resources and service

    www.catlabs.info | https://www.facebook.com/CatLABS.of.JP | www.jobo-usa.com

Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin