Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,227   Posts: 1,532,691   Online: 747
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,609
    After testing with several developers the "best" results (still overall poor tonality and abysmal speed, but to each his own) I was able to get with this film were with TD-3 developer (a dilute catechol-based formula) so perhaps this may be an additional option for some people to explore. I did this work before "Adotech II" was available, but Adotech I was crap.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    654
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael R 1974 View Post
    After testing with several developers the "best" results (still overall poor tonality and abysmal speed, but to each his own) I was able to get with this film were with TD-3 developer (a dilute catechol-based formula) so perhaps this may be an additional option for some people to explore. I did this work before "Adotech II" was available, but Adotech I was crap.
    How it was crap, Michael?
    If I am not mistaken Your ride with CMS20 was very brief.
    System like CMS20 will always multiply operator errors, a lot. CMS20 requires knowledge, experience, discipline and it's definitely not the average Joe, McDonald's kinda film.

  3. #23
    Bruce Robbins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Carnoustie, Scotland
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    109
    CMS certainly polarises opinion. David Bivins seems to get good results using diafine. http://davidshootsfilm.com/2010/06/0...t-adox-cms-20/
    The Online Darkroom
    www.theonlinedarkroom.com

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,609
    Quote Originally Posted by georg16nik View Post
    How it was crap, Michael?
    If I am not mistaken Your ride with CMS20 was very brief.
    System like CMS20 will always multiply operator errors, a lot. CMS20 requires knowledge, experience, discipline and it's definitely not the average Joe, McDonald's kinda film.
    Operator error and McDonalds are always nice excuses for these films, but I assure you there was no operator error, and testing was extensive, backed by plenty of "knowledge, experience and discipline". So I wanted to put TD-3 out there as another developer people might want to try if they are serious about using this film. It's just an alternative. Relax.

    I have nothing personal against CMS20. Why would I? In the end it simply depends on what one wants out of a film - the ultimate in potential (not necessarily realized) resolution, or a long tonal scale (and resonable film speed). There is no way around that, and I have never seen any evidence (image scans, prints, densitometry) to the contrary. Sorry. The images people post only confirm my test results. CMS20 is not a substitute for larger film in any way other than sheer resolution and granularity. That statement needs to be made for the benefit of less experienced workers.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    654
    Images
    15
    I asked in regards to:
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael R 1974 View Post
    ....but Adotech I was crap.
    Quote Originally Posted by georg16nik View Post
    How it was crap, Michael?..
    Is Your answer encoded in what You just wrote? I still cant figure out why You think it was crap..

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,609
    Sorry about that (forgot to answer the actual question ).

    Regarding Adotech I (I have not tested the newer formula), my characterization of it is primarily in the context of it having been advertised as "perfectly matched" to CMS20. First I found film speed to be exceedingly slow versus what was advertised, even with more dilution, different agitation schemes etc. I would not normally consider this a fault in a developer, except that when I tried other developers it was far easier to get as good a curve (or better) with slightly higher speed. Second, it was extremely prone to uneven development. Most people probably don't notice it in detailed images, but in critical tests it was very obvious.

    Calling it crap was probably a little harsh, but I think people could do quite a bit better with other developers. Having said that, it is possible the newer version of Adotech works better and is indeed the best match for this film.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    654
    Images
    15
    Michael, the speed was slower if You develop at 20°C.
    Everything else is up to developing technique and tools, water etc. You can not treat microfilm like You would FP4+, tX or tMax.
    Back in the days folks used to disregard Kodak's own developer for Tech Pan. The developer was optimized but people didn't knew how to operate the process or simply wanted a cat instead of a dog.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    120
    I said I'd come back with a comparison to see what can be extracted if we wanted to do contact printing. In this case it was a <ahem> hybrid approach where I scanned and have printed a mylar sheet to show the resolution is kept intact. The result from the Mamiya 7 is more resolution than the universally applauded (in the digital world) IQ180 but with a similar level of contrast and gradation. I was very impressed with the dynamic range of the film in the end, even if it is all compressed in highlight and shadow.

    http://static.timparkin.co.uk/static...0-vs-iq180.jpg

    From what I've seen, I can imagine this film would be tough to print in the darkroom unless you've done some serious sensitometry (or got some great advice). Personally I'll carry on playing with this in the Mamiya and try 35mm just to see what's possible.

    Tim

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,609
    Quote Originally Posted by georg16nik View Post
    Michael, the speed was slower if You develop at 20°C.
    Everything else is up to developing technique and tools, water etc. You can not treat microfilm like You would FP4+, tX or tMax.
    Back in the days folks used to disregard Kodak's own developer for Tech Pan. The developer was optimized but people didn't knew how to operate the process or simply wanted a cat instead of a dog.
    This has absolutely nothing to do with FP4, TMX or any other general purpose film.

    If the results are poor when following the manufacturers directions exactly and repeatedly (which they were, and I am not the only one who found these problems), with distilled water, and results were superior with other developers - with the same film, the developer is a flawed formulation. And the fact they needed to reformulate this "perfectly matched" developer does not help the case for it. Tech Pan/Technidol was an entirely different combination.

    Anyway, I don't want to get into an argument over this. Everyone should shoot whatever ever film they like. I'll just continue waiting for someone to show me a single picture made with CMS20 that does not look exactly like it was shot on a short scale, high contrast document/micro film.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    432
    Hello Bruce,

    sorry for my late reply. But lot's to do because of the Photokina you know
    http://www.apug.org/forums/forum390/...h-version.html .

    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Robbins View Post
    That's quite incredible Henning. I have shot a couple of rolls of CMS 20 but my darkroom went out of commission around the same time (long story) and I just scanned a few negs to see what they were like. I ddn't like the tonality but then I hate scanning. That was rating the film at 20 ISO and developing in Adotech. I might try again, rating it at 10 ISO and using my Zeiss lenses with the camera on a tripod to see what it's capable of.
    I get the best results using the dedicated Spur / Adotech II developers. As always with all film - developer combinations, the best method is testing the combination with the Zone Sytem method evaluating the characteristic curve.
    I've got a very good characteristic curve (and therefore very good tonality) with about one stop less speed and reduced development time. Then I have a linear curve up to Zone VII, and in the highlight Zones VIII - X the curve is a bit flattening, like you have it with a standard compensating developer - standard film combination.

    The film is definitely not a real ISO 20 film. Give it more light (less speed) and a shorter development time and you will receive a much better tonality, and sufficient shadow detail.

    Agfa Copex Rapid with the dedicated Spur Modular UR New is a different animal: Real ISO 32-40 and an ideal linear characteristic curve.
    But CoRa has not the incredible high resolution and extremely fine grain compared to CMS 20.
    But CoRa's resolution and edge sharpness is still significantly higher than TMX, Acros etc. (see my first posting in this thread).

    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Robbins View Post
    Sorry to keep asking questions but have you tried CMS 20 in any other developer? I was wondering how Barry Thornton's two-bath might work. I've also read that some people get god results with Diafine.

    Bruce
    Yes, I have tried it in very strong diluted Rodinal, but results were much worse compared to the Spur developers.
    Currently I have tested it as a reversal film in the Agfa Scala process.
    And the results are quite good.

    Best regards,
    Henning

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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