Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,526   Posts: 1,572,361   Online: 1044
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 35 of 35
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,777
    A lot of mixing of oranges and apples here. Pan F is a very slow film (typically ASA25) with a long toe, early shoulder, and short straight line, so needs very careful exposure and development, and is
    probably not the best choice for high contrast scenes. FP4 and ACROS are long-scale medium-toe
    films which I personally rate at 50 for pyro, but differ in spectral sensitivity - ACROS will deliver slightly finer grain, but both films are lovely. TMX100 is a fairly high contrast short-toe film which should NOT be overexposed or it can shoulder off, but will deliver excellent shadow gradation. TMY400 is distinctly grainier, but for its speed very fine, and an excellent all-purpose film if you like a
    relatively long straight line rather than a more gradual toe. I've used all these fims in everything from
    35mm to 8X10, with the exception of Pan F of course, which is only avail up to 120 size. Each has
    its own personality, though I'd call all these films excellent in overall quality.

  2. #32
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,793
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by msbarnes View Post
    That too makes sense. A little more cumbersome but more economical nonetheless.
    I agree, it's a reasonable fix, I may even have to try it some.

    The other thing I like about short rolls though is that I can keep subjects separated in the field and if I decide I need to adjust development I can write the info on the can and keep shooting.
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

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

  3. #33
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,132
    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.
    Actually this (the short roll approach) makes zero sense to me, but the reason was clear on 10 seconds of thought. I agree that it makes sense for you. The difference is in our reasons for wanting the shorter rolls.

    You apparently have a very different reason for wanting shorter rolls. In your case the issue seems to be getting the film out and processed now. That's not my reason at all for liking shorter rolls. There's often months delay between my shooting and getting to process the film (stored refrigerated in the interim and I try to get to Pan F+ and Delta 3200 sooner but even they can be weeks.) If I just wanted to process the shots now I'd cheerfully do what you do and never even have mentioned it here.

    Rather, my reason, especially with slower films like we're talking about here, is almost always because I want to load a different film in the camera. I have three 35mm bodies I regularly use but still often don't have an empty one or one with the film I want to use when I next shoot. I do mid roll changes sometimes, just rewind the film but leave the leader out and write a note on the leader about the next frame number, then when I reload click off, with the lens cap on, all the already shot frames plus, typically, one more to be sure. If you are consistent in how you load the camera this works, and probably wastes less film than loading shorter rolls, but I still find it rather annoying.

    Actually what you propose, while it will work fine with factory loads, is risky with bulk loaded film anyway, at least if you use a daylight loader in daylight. The reason is that the tail of the film, not just the leader, will be fogged and if you pull out part of a roll in the dark and re-trim a new leader it will be almost impossible to tell exactly where the unfogged loaded film ends and the fogged tail begins. I suppose with practice this could become pretty apparent but without practice at this you'd risk making exposures on the fogged film tail.

    I have done exactly what you say with factory loads, though.

  4. #34
    msbarnes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    382
    Images
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    Actually this (the short roll approach) makes zero sense to me, but the reason was clear on 10 seconds of thought. I agree that it makes sense for you. The difference is in our reasons for wanting the shorter rolls.

    You apparently have a very different reason for wanting shorter rolls. In your case the issue seems to be getting the film out and processed now. That's not my reason at all for liking shorter rolls. There's often months delay between my shooting and getting to process the film (stored refrigerated in the interim and I try to get to Pan F+ and Delta 3200 sooner but even they can be weeks.) If I just wanted to process the shots now I'd cheerfully do what you do and never even have mentioned it here.

    Rather, my reason, especially with slower films like we're talking about here, is almost always because I want to load a different film in the camera. I have three 35mm bodies I regularly use but still often don't have an empty one or one with the film I want to use when I next shoot. I do mid roll changes sometimes, just rewind the film but leave the leader out and write a note on the leader about the next frame number, then when I reload click off, with the lens cap on, all the already shot frames plus, typically, one more to be sure. If you are consistent in how you load the camera this works, and probably wastes less film than loading shorter rolls, but I still find it rather annoying.

    Actually what you propose, while it will work fine with factory loads, is risky with bulk loaded film anyway, at least if you use a daylight loader in daylight. The reason is that the tail of the film, not just the leader, will be fogged and if you pull out part of a roll in the dark and re-trim a new leader it will be almost impossible to tell exactly where the unfogged loaded film ends and the fogged tail begins. I suppose with practice this could become pretty apparent but without practice at this you'd risk making exposures on the fogged film tail.

    I have done exactly what you say with factory loads, though.
    Thank you, that is very good advice! That makes sense too.

    The thing is, I'm in no rush to develop film, but I'm a bit picky on the film/development combination. Sometimes I want slow emulsions, other times fast emulsions, sometimes I want to push, and sometimes I want color. It depends mostly on what the lighting demands. I'm usually not so particular with 35mm and I can compromise, but only to an extent. Your advice is very good and I think that I should take advantage of mid-roll changes.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    262
    Images
    29
    I've used Pan F+ for years in 120. I live in LA so we have plenty of sun for me to rate it at 25 and still get shutter speeds of 125 and higher. Yes, it does take some time to get used to, but once you do, it's a great film. I use Rodinal 1+100 for 18 minutes with regular agitation. I've also kept exposed rolls of Pan F+ in my freezer for over a year and they came out fine when developed.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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