Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 73,131   Posts: 1,613,679   Online: 844
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    20
    Thank you for clarifying the grain structure. I had the impression that ISO 200 was modern grain, as many have believed so too. I'll base my decision on speed and grain (assuming that lower ISO is finer, as it is with most films).

    Another question. How do you guys usually rate this film? Compared to ilford/kodak/fuji. I'm not so picky but I usually overexpose 1 stop with rodinal/hc-110 and rate it at box speed with D76. I incident and oftentimes guess/adjust with my eyes because my bodies don't have meters and I walk around a lot. Ofcourse I'l have to play around with these things myself but a little insight would be beneficial to me.

  2. #12
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,647
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    439
    The Foma/Arista needs a good full stop of additional exposure to take best advantage of the film. I normally rate the 200 at 100, and the 100 at 50.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,286
    Images
    21
    It's probably safe to say HC-110 is going to be acceptable with pretty much any film. I don't think I've ever used it with Fomapan 100, but I developed a little bit of 400 in it and liked the results (e.g., the attached image, from a 6x6 frame shot with a Nettar folder). I didn't really find that the 400 film gave me anything special over HP5 or TX, but it was fine.

    I shoot a lot of Fomapan 100, though; I like the tonality, especially at 50. It's grainy for its speed, which is a potential issue in 35mm but negligible in MF or LF. I have had a few pinholes, and several years ago I got one roll that looked like it had a bizarre coating defect throughout, but I'm also in the situation where as a hobbyist I can afford to roll with problems like that rather than worry about them.

    Well worth experimenting with in your situation, for certain.

    -NT

    Nathan Tenny
    San Diego, CA, USA

    The lady of the house has to be a pretty swell sort of person to put up with the annoyance of a photographer.
    -The Little Technical Library, _Developing, Printing, And Enlarging_

  4. #14
    arealitystudios's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    215
    I’ve been using the Arista.edu line for years, mostly in 120 and a little bit in 4x5. I admit I don’t like it as much as say HP5 or PanF but for the price you really can’t complain at all. Much like a bottle of two buck chuck it gets the job done when you need it to and the end result is more or less the same.

    My only real complaint about the stuff is the fact that there is a very steep sensitivity fall off when it comes to long exposures. I shoot a lot of pinhole work and when it comes to any exposure over say 2 seconds I will often double or even triple the measured exposure time to get a good negative. Once you learn this it becomes a non-issue. As with any film there is a learning curve.

    My last order of Arista.edu actually had a clear base, not the usual blue.

  5. #15
    polyglot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    South Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,395
    Images
    12
    I've used the 100 and 200 (blue) in 4x5 and 120, they're great but the 200 is/was quite coarsely crunchy (similar to HP5 yet 1.5 stops slower) and came scratched. I tend to shoot them at about EI50 and EI125 respectively though you can go pretty close to box speed in Xtol.

    I wouldn't use HC-110 personally since it's speed-reducing and produces pretty coarse grain, both of which are going to accentuate the primary faults of these films.

    Reciprocity failure is terrible so don't bother shooting it at night.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati Ohio USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    674
    Quote Originally Posted by arealitystudios View Post

    My only real complaint about the stuff is the fact that there is a very steep sensitivity fall off when it comes to long exposures. I shoot a lot of pinhole work and when it comes to any exposure over say 2 seconds I will often double or even triple the measured exposure time to get a good negative. Once you learn this it becomes a non-issue. As with any film there is a learning curve.
    I actually LIKE the fact that is loses sensitivity on long shots. I do pinhole shots of public spaces inside and have exposures of several minutes. If a person walks through the shot he does not register in the image because he is moving.

    On another note the 100 speed responds wonderfully to green light film latensification. I can get a true EI of 250 -320 with it. Yes I tested it with a step tablet so I know the speed increase is real.

  7. #17
    Richard Sintchak (rich815)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    San Francisco area (Albany, California)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,594
    Images
    2

    so i want to get some film...arista.edu

    I've been shooting off a bulk roll of the 200 lately. Really nice.
    -----------------------

    "Well, my photos are actually much better than they look..."

    Richard S.
    Albany, CA (San Francisco bay area)

    My Flickr River of photographs
    http://flickriver.com/photos/rich815...r-interesting/

    My Photography Website
    http://www.lightshadowandtone.com

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Tyler, Texas USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    101
    Images
    20
    This was shot on my first roll of Arista EDU 200 and developed in Arista premium developer at 1:7.

    [IMG] 00430014.jpg by KentWebb, on Flickr[/IMG]

    The 200 does not seem to curl as much as the 100. Don't know why...

    Try some, I think you will like it.

    Regards,
    Kent

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    fairfield county, Ct.
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,836
    Images
    24
    only used the 200 in sheets....but I really like the tonality that it gives...sort of an older film look...do yourself a favor and develop it in xtol 1:2 or similar. I just rate it at asa 125 and don't even worry about the filter factor!! have fun..it's great film for little money...
    Best. Peter
    website down for maintenance!

  10. #20
    Stephanie Brim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Iowa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,607
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by polyglot View Post
    I've used the 100 and 200 (blue) in 4x5 and 120, they're great but the 200 is/was quite coarsely crunchy (similar to HP5 yet 1.5 stops slower) and came scratched. I tend to shoot them at about EI50 and EI125 respectively though you can go pretty close to box speed in Xtol.

    I wouldn't use HC-110 personally since it's speed-reducing and produces pretty coarse grain, both of which are going to accentuate the primary faults of these films.

    Reciprocity failure is terrible so don't bother shooting it at night.
    I should also point out that I'm still using Blue. I'm running through the last of that stock before I buy more.
    No idea what's going to happen next, but I'm hoping it involves being wrist deep in chemicals come the weekend.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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