Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,687   Posts: 1,548,640   Online: 1205
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35
  1. #21
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,917
    Quote Originally Posted by msbarnes View Post
    I ordered a can of fp4+ and a few rolls of panf+. Those interests me the most because they're traditional and the most readily available (now and in the future). You can't buy APX100 (I don't think?) nor can you buy Acros in 100' rolls. I'd prefer to bulk load to economize. Truthfully, I don't like bulk loading, but it's something that I feel I should do for the sake of economy.

    fp4+ sounds like a safer bet but panf+ still interests me. I'll see how it goes.
    I don't think bulk loading saves that much these days, not enough to personally pay me for the agravation, anyway.

    The advantage, though, is that I find 36 exposure loads annoyingly long and you can load shorter - some waste, but not that much and still slightly cheaper than factory 36s. IF I shot very much black and white in 35mm I might do it for that reason but having two medium format cameras has almost completely eliminated my black and white 35mm.

  2. #22
    Tony-S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    719
    Images
    14
    I do like the fewer frames per roll option with bulk loading, but considering you lose five frames per roll it makes it difficult to do. I generally load 'em up with 36 frames and start shooting.

    It would be great if Acros were available in 100 foot rolls, though. It would save about 50% per roll.

  3. #23
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,917
    I just added it up and I guess you're right - it does save about half. It seemed to me that it didn't because Tri-X is available cheap in the Arista brand and HP5+ in the three packs. But for FP4+ it does indeed.

  4. #24
    JPD
    JPD is offline
    JPD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    772
    Quote Originally Posted by msbarnes View Post
    I ordered a can of fp4+ and a few rolls of panf+.

    fp4+ sounds like a safer bet but panf+ still interests me. I'll see how it goes.
    You can try to shoot Pan F at 25 ASA and develop it in your Xtol or Rodinal (1+50 or 1+100) for 25-30% less time than recommended for 50 ASA. That should tame the contrast and you'll get more details in the shadows. It's a wonderful film.
    J. Patric Dahlén

  5. #25
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,917
    Shoot at box speed or 64 and develop in Diafine (or other two bath developer at appropriate speed) - works well too.

    This is from 6x6 Pan F+ in Diafine, EI 64:


    Apalachicola Beach 1 by Roger Cole, on Flickr

  6. #26
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,751
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    I just added it up and I guess you're right - it does save about half. It seemed to me that it didn't because Tri-X is available cheap in the Arista brand and HP5+ in the three packs. But for FP4+ it does indeed.
    The other big thing that bulk loading does for me is to not waste as much tail. Like the OP I don't always do 36 shots on a roll. In fact 36-shot rolls are normally 15-25 shots too long for me, I don't normally leave film languishing in the camera so that means a lot of waste. 24-shot rolls from anybody but me cost me more per inch of film.

    Hand rolling allows me to make two rolls out of roughly the same amount of film instead of wasting a lot.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  7. #27
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,917
    I understand. That roll of Arista branded Tri-X I got I've been loading into 24 shot rolls.

  8. #28
    BetterSense's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Carolina
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,871
    Whether or not bulk loading saves money, depends on the film. You just have to do the math. Last time I did, I decided that TMAX was worth bulk loading.

    Making short rolls because you find it hard to shoot a whole roll doesn't make sense to me. It makes more sense just to use full rolls, develop what you have exposed and leave the rest in the camera. When I have a half a roll I want to develop, I just go in the darkroom or changing bag, pop the back open without rewinding, tear the film off and pull out the exposed strip, and load it on a reel. Later, in the light, I just trim the leader left in the camera and reload the camera.
    f/22 and be there.

  9. #29
    cliveh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3,353
    Images
    343
    FP4, what more could you wish for.

    “The contemplation of things as they are, without error or confusion, without substitution or imposture, is in itself a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention”

    Francis Bacon

  10. #30
    msbarnes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    382
    Images
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by BetterSense View Post
    Whether or not bulk loading saves money, depends on the film. You just have to do the math. Last time I did, I decided that TMAX was worth bulk loading.

    Making short rolls because you find it hard to shoot a whole roll doesn't make sense to me. It makes more sense just to use full rolls, develop what you have exposed and leave the rest in the camera. When I have a half a roll I want to develop, I just go in the darkroom or changing bag, pop the back open without rewinding, tear the film off and pull out the exposed strip, and load it on a reel. Later, in the light, I just trim the leader left in the camera and reload the camera.
    That too makes sense. A little more cumbersome but more economical nonetheless.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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