New Arista Premium 100 & 400 films
It was only a week ago that the Arista Premium 400 hit the discussion fan on APUG. The discussion also wandered into a digital vs. film topic - actually very good - and now the 100 is available in bulk. At Steve's suggestion, I thought this thread could get back on track and be more current.
The 24 & 36 exposure rolls will be available Aug 15th at prices hardly worth rolling your own.
Those who have tested the 400 say, indeed, it seems to be Tri-X. Walks like a duck, quacks....
The 100 is hoped to be Plus-X, one of the most wonderful but over priced films out there.
So, in the spirit of the (Photo) Olympics, let the discussions begin!
If it is Plus-X, why would it be rated at ISO 100 instead of 125? As a way of disguising its true origins?
Jim MacKenzie - Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
A bunch of Nikons; Feds, Zorkis and a Kiev; Pentax 67-II (inherited from my deceased father-in-law); Bronica SQ-A; and a nice Shen Hao 4x5 field camera with 3 decent lenses that needs to be taken outside more. Oh, and as of mid-2012, one of those bodies we don't talk about here.
Favourite film: do I need to pick only one?
Short answer, "Yes, quite possibly."
Fully discussed previously. Short version: 1/3 stop is rather meaningless i the real world, especially in roll films.
Originally Posted by PhotoJim
I hope this stuff is indeed PX & TX. However, we can do all the shooting and looking we want, but what we need is a scientific test. Arista 100 & 400 shot in identical light along with PX & TX and all souped in the same dev for the same time with the same agitation and then given densitometer and possibly other tests to see how closely they match.
Has anyone does this? Do they want to do it?
Reminds me of the classic movie scene of soldiers lined up and being asked to volunteer for a deadly mission. Everyone except one doofus steps back.
Originally Posted by jim appleyard
Well, that would be one very tedious way. The fact that all development times in all developers are the same as the Kodak offerings practically speaks for itself. The fact that, I think it was Steve, on the previous thread got 1600 EI out of the 400 in Diafine also narrows it down.
I think the case for the AP 400 being Tri-X is pretty well settled. It walks and talks exactly like that Kodak duck. For me - until proven otherwise - it's as good as running it through all those tests.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Has anyone called Freestyle and asked? They are generally pretty responsive to questions. Might be a tad easier than science or speculation.
Originally Posted by jim appleyard
After reading all the posts on this thread and the other one about Arista Premium film I have to agree with Paul on this one. Look, the film is made in America, has the exact development times as Tri X and Plus X and face it the only company making film in America is Kodak. I think this is great since I love both films and have shot at least ten rolls of Plus X and Tri X in the last month alone. I will be buying some of the Arista brand in bulk rolls this month since it is such a savings over the Kodak branded box. I just think that everyone should stop obsessing about testing for months on end and buy some too. Then get out and take some photos, have fun and enjoy that Freestyle is offering a great film at a very affordable price.
Hey Freestyle! Where's the 120?
Also covered in previous thread
FS is pretty tight lipped about it. Very unusual for them. I'm sure at some time in the future someone will either slip or get tired of being clammed up.
Originally Posted by BrianShaw
What makes a film a PX or a Tx? Or any other designated brand and item?
Because someone says it is? Because PX diverted to FS obviously is? There have been numerous formulations of old "X" timers over the years, yet they are all the real thing.
If a film is indistinguishble in performance and development times, no less, its the same thing. Even if another company were to make it. Or Kodak lets it be marketed as Arista Premium.
"A rose is a rose is a rose."
Yes, the bottom line!
I will reiterate an observation of mine from the old thread that I will not find it logical to buy 100' rolls - which is what I almost always do. The cost difference, $6, for 18 rolls of 36 exposure says my time is worth that much.
Originally Posted by msuchan
Now, here's where things get interesting. Will the carts be staked or not? Which might also mean are the rolls produced with Kodak or reloads by FS? The latter used to do a LOT of reloads in years gone buy. I've bought Ilford films reloaded at the same time they sold the real thing. Also T-Max 100 and Eastman 5222 XX. Maybe they just needed to dust off the old stuff. However, those reloads were not boxed and these new Premiums are.