Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,688   Posts: 1,548,664   Online: 1213
      
Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910
Results 91 to 96 of 96
  1. #91
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,062
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by cliveh View Post
    When you go to sleep tonight, try and imagine that chemical photography hasn't been discovered and think how such a concept may produce a practical image. This may lead to a process not yet discovered.
    I've BTDT. That was my job for years. I also worked on light sensitive copper systems. It still does not explain what you mean.

    PE

  2. #92
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,917
    Quote Originally Posted by NB23 View Post
    Ian, I was fan of apx100. Used a lot of it in 94 to 98. It was notorious in the market for being the iso 100 film with he biggest grain. As a matter of fact, it was never even marketed as a fine grain film while tmax' motto was "fine grain".
    No, it wasn't. Popular Photography did a comparison of 100 speed films and it won overall, and none were particularly large grained.

    I still have some frozen, unopened boxes of 4x5. Great stuff.

  3. #93

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    721
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    No, it wasn't. Popular Photography did a comparison of 100 speed films and it won overall, and none were particularly large grained.

    I still have some frozen, unopened boxes of 4x5. Great stuff.

    Won "overall"? Well of course. It was the cheapest iso 100 film in the market. For the price it was the best "overall" film by far. And one of my all time favorite, partly because of its gorgeous looks and partly because it was the cheapest

    RMS ratings place APX second to TMX in the granularity department and very, very far away in the sharpness/resolving department. You may not agree with this but it's all over Google and it's all over my prints as well. I can't argue against that.

  4. #94

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    US
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,060
    PE, it's heartening to see a guy doing his work and liking it, after serving his term. I wish I had some of that. Because the day these printing presses are dragged out of here, there never was a man thinking good riddance more than I will be.. Although I still do good work, and don't get careless just because I'd rather be at the dentist at the time. I don't think I'd deserve the respect of your type if I hated it AND did careless work just to escape it quicker. I'm not sure any of that even computes.
    Last edited by Tom1956; 12-18-2013 at 12:04 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #95
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,917
    Quote Originally Posted by NB23 View Post
    Won "overall"? Well of course. It was the cheapest iso 100 film in the market. For the price it was the best "overall" film by far. And one of my all time favorite, partly because of its gorgeous looks and partly because it was the cheapest

    RMS ratings place APX second to TMX in the granularity department and very, very far away in the sharpness/resolving department. You may not agree with this but it's all over Google and it's all over my prints as well. I can't argue against that.
    Eh? TMX didn't even EXIST when they did that comparison. It was pre-t-grain days then. And I don't remember the individual scores, though I might possibly have that issue in a box somewhere. The competition was Plus-X, FP4 (I think pre +, not sure when the plus was added) and Neopan 400. Neopan came in second and a friend of mine changed from Plus-X to it because we could buy it locally, or at least he could (he lived about 30 miles away, we were friends via ham radio and the high school yearbook photographers for our respective schools, which places this about 1980 or 81 or so.)

    If by claiming it was not fine grained you mean it was coarser grained than TMX, I agree. So is everything else in conventional film, even Pan-X was. But it was finer grained than Plus-X, for example. Since you like RMS figures, APX100 was rated at RMS 9, Plus-X at RMS 10:

    http://www.digitaltruth.com/products...tech/FPD1e.pdf

    http://www.kodak.com/global/en/profe...Pubs/f8/f8.pdf

    You may not agree with that either but it's all over the web.

  6. #96

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by NB23 View Post
    Oh boy... I'm in a 20x24 marathon. I've been printing all my "best of" 35mm negatives since 1990 on 16x2" and 20x24 fb....
    WOW ! That explains a lot...but why you do that ? (Pun aside.)

    And hey, , you didn't mention Delta 100. It supposed to have better sharpness and smaller grain than TMX... ?

Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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