Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,550   Posts: 1,544,870   Online: 977
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34
  1. #21
    haziz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    170
    Quote Originally Posted by avandesande
    Acros and rodinal are a great looking combo.
    enjoy your trip!
    Looks like it's going to be Acros in Quickloads, with some Velvia 50 in Quickloads. Will likely use Rodinal, though as a safety margin may keep the second shot of each image as a safety measure and dev either again in Rodinal or possibly Xtol 1:1. I may in fact have to carry a Canon 35 mm film camera in addtion for my Velvia metering since I have had better luck with that in the past vs using the Pentax digital spot meter which works great for me for B&W.

    BTW I ususally do two shots of every scene for insurance but this seems almost wasteful with the quickloads though since the trip is not very conveniently repeatable will likely still do it this way.

    Thanks.

    Sincerely,

    Hany.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,025
    Quote Originally Posted by haziz
    Looks like it's going to be Acros in Quickloads, with some Velvia 50 in Quickloads. Will likely use Rodinal, though as a safety margin may keep the second shot of each image as a safety measure and dev either again in Rodinal or possibly Xtol 1:1. I may in fact have to carry a Canon 35 mm film camera in addtion for my Velvia metering since I have had better luck with that in the past vs using the Pentax digital spot meter which works great for me for B&W.

    BTW I ususally do two shots of every scene for insurance but this seems almost wasteful with the quickloads though since the trip is not very conveniently repeatable will likely still do it this way.

    Thanks.

    Sincerely,

    Hany.
    Just makre sure you shoot a handful of Acros test exposures to develop before you do the real negs!

  3. #23
    jeroldharter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,958
    Images
    1
    Haziz,

    I don't think you have enough equipment. Carry on? You must be a great packer.
    Jerold Harter MD

  4. #24
    haziz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    170
    Quote Originally Posted by jeroldharter
    Haziz,

    I don't think you have enough equipment. Carry on? You must be a great packer.
    Yes I am taking way too much equipment. However I should be able to take a 4x5 and 6x7 setup using only one backpack.

    The F64 "8x10" backpack accomodates a 4x5 (Canham or Toyo AII) with 5, possibly 6 smallish lenses (75, 90, 135, 200, 300, possibly 450), plus a Mamiya 7II with 2 possibly 3 lenses, spot-meter, loupe and quickload holder and maybe 1 packet of quickloads. I have packed it this weekend just to make sure. I will ship the film to my motel ahead of time. Tripod and darkcloth goes into my checked luggage. I can't see how I would be able to squeeze in a 35 mm camera though I would have prefered to take one for metering Velvia but not the B&W.

    I do shoot the Acros fairly regularly though FP4+ is my usual fim. I did shoot a further 20 sheets of the Acros last weekend. I developed about half of them and the film looks good in Rodinal 1:50. I have done densitometer testing for film speed (EI 80) but have yet to do a formal Zone VIII test for final development time.

    Sorry for all my posts, however I did want some feedback as a reality check since I had a nagging sensation my original plans were too extravagant.

    Sincerely,

    Hany.

  5. #25
    noseoil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Tucson
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,898
    Images
    17
    Hany, with the Velvia try this with the spot meter. Decide which is the brightest area in which you want to hold texture. Meter this spot. Add 1.5 stops of exposure and shoot. Again, a polarizer and 81a or 81b filter would be a good choice. tim

  6. #26
    Petzi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Europe
    Shooter
    Med. Format Pan
    Posts
    857
    If 4x5" Quickloads are OK for you, you should use the Fuji Acros. If you want to use regular 4x5" sheets, these may be harder to get. I would definitely use Kodak TMax then. TMax also has excellent behaviour for long exposures.

    I would avoid FP4+, it is old technology, which some people prefer, but newer films are just sharper and have finer grain.

  7. #27
    haziz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    170
    Quote Originally Posted by Petzi
    I would avoid FP4+, it is old technology, which some people prefer, but newer films are just sharper and have finer grain.
    Interesting. I actually prefer the FP4+, and would have used it in a heartbeat on such a trip if it was available in quickloads/readyloads. I wish Ilford would license the technology from either Kodak or Fuji and issue FP4+ and HP5+ in either format. The one area where Acros is truly unique is it's superlative reciprocity characteristics. I have used Acros for 2-4 minute exposures before, but most of the shots taken last weekend were in fact indoors available light shots in a dim place and the exposures varied from 2 minutes to 30 minutes and indeed once again Fuji's claim of no reciprocity failure up to 2 minutes and the need for only a 1/2 stop correction beyond 2 minutes proves correct. Of course it's grain is also very fine specially when compared with an old style film like FP4+. In my humble opinion though FP4+ remains an absolutely superb and very easy to work with film. With regards to sharpness also while Acros is vey fine grained, sharpness or acutance wise FP4+ may in fact trump it specially if you use an acutance developer such as Acutol or dilute Rodinal.

    Sincerely,

    Hany

  8. #28
    Petzi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Europe
    Shooter
    Med. Format Pan
    Posts
    857
    To each his own. We are lucky there is so much choice of quality b/w films. FP4 is a product I replaced with T-Max about 18 or 20 years ago though. Never used FP4+ but I guess it's not much different from FP4.

  9. #29
    ZoneIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    247
    Images
    35
    You clearly agonize too much over small things. I mean absolutely no disrespect but I am a bit bewildered by your question. (Yes, I realize I am getting into this thread very late.) Basically, your question is about which of two very similar films OTHER people prefer. But you go on and on about all kinds of details that have little or nothing to do with the question - your formats, EIs, development times, types of holders you use, places you will be traveling too, etc. - even your agitation methods(?). You are making a trivial thing into a big, complicated matter. But, in the end, you are simply asking people which of the two very similar films THEY prefer. In fact, your question should have simply been, "Which film do you prefer of the two and why do you prefer it?" Surely your question is not intended only for people traveling to the same locations, using the same equipment, developers, EIs, agitation, etc. You are really just asking about two similar films that you have experience with.

    You have tested and used both films so you should be the one answering your own question. Nobody can tell you what film YOU will like better. That's something only you can decide and you have had plenty of experience with both films.

    I am also bewildered about why you would be so concerned about subject movement with two such similar films. If you are so concerned about that, use a faster film. Do what most people do... take a slow and a fast film. I take Tmax100 and Tri-X. Simple as that! The tiny differences in the speed of these films (if any) is nothing to fret about. It almost sounds as if these things are keeping you up at night.

    You have used them both. Which one do YOU like better? In the end, the judgment is subjective nobody can answer it for you. It's a simple as that. It seems as if you are trying to get other people to confirm your own judgments. I would suggest that you... 1) stop worrying about such trivial things and... 2) trust your own judgment.

    Again, I mean no disrespect but I have noticed that some photographers seem to agonize over trivial things to the point that they seem to drive themselves nuts. I have also noticed that those photographers worry so much about inconsequential things that it actually hurts their photography. They have a difficult time making the most simple decisions. On the other hand, some of the finest photographers I have known don't worry about even some of the big things that they probably should be concerned about. But you are getting into hair-splitting to an excessive degree. I also suspect, based on all the equipment and formats you listed, that you always have something on a list of photographic things to buy and that you have convinced yourself will finally bring you to photographic heaven once you have them. It won't happen! It's a futile pursuit and it distracts from good photography. I have never seen a good photographer agonize over equipment. The best photographers almost always keep thing simple. It's just tools. Leave the accumulation of endless equipment to collectors who, by the way, almost never make good photographers.

    I read in a forum lately where someone gave the old advice to filter chemistry that may have stuff in it through coffee filters. The guy who asked the original question wrote back asking which brand of coffee filters he should use! I have also noticed at least one person in these very forums obsessing about testing almost every conceivable film/developer combination. It seems like that person is also trying almost every conceivable esoteric process even though it is clear that they haven't even begun to master the most basic processes. That type of thinking is a disease of the mind that keeps people from making good photographs. Ironically, but not surprising, the person I am thinking of ends up making blurred and improperly exposed photographs! It's a if he is driving himself nuts trying to find a way to make bad photographs(???). He clearly is reading too many photography magazines.

    Take it easy on yourself and enjoy your photography. Simplify. Don't worry about such inconsequential things.

    As for the amount of your equipment... I take a lot of equipment too not in so many formats. I shoot about 95% in 4x5" and about 5% in 8x10". I don't have a fancy digital camera (and have no plans of getting one) so I don't shoot anything serious in digital. If I need small format, I shoot in 35mm or, if I just want a snapshot, I use my wife's little compact digital camera. I also take a medium format back for 4x5 but that is mainly to give me the equivalent of a longer maximum focal length lens if I should need it. I rarely use it. I take three films... Velvia for color and Tmax100 and Tri-X for b&w. I rarely need the Tri-X, though, and would feel perfectly comfortable with just Tmax100.

    The problem I can see for you when taking as much equipment as you do is that if you are having such a hard time deciding over two very similar films that you have tested and used, I can picture you having a very hard time deciding which of your equipment to use for a given picture. I can almost picture you simply not making a picture because you can't decide what equipment to use. If that's the case, it's time for you to get rid of some of your equipment. Travel light! You clearly need less decisions to make, not more.

    It sounds like you are too much into equipment and technicalities. I suspect that that has negative impact on your photography. It's supposed to be enjoyable, not something to lose sleep over. When a totally new film comes out that may offer you some advantages in quality, ask about it and try it. But why ask others which of two very similar films they like better when you have used them both yourself?

    Simplify.

    I hope you don't take this wrong but I have seen this too many times. It's like a syndrome and it can paralize a photographer.

    Best

  10. #30
    ZoneIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    247
    Images
    35
    I haven't read this entire thread but after I posted my reply, I saw this at the top of the page:
    Looks like it's going to be Acros in Quickloads, with some Velvia 50 in Quickloads. Will likely use Rodinal, though as a safety margin may keep the second shot of each image as a safety measure and dev either again in Rodinal or possibly Xtol 1:1. I may in fact have to carry a Canon 35 mm film camera in addtion for my Velvia metering since I have had better luck with that in the past vs using the Pentax digital spot meter which works great for me for B&W.

    BTW I ususally do two shots of every scene for insurance but this seems almost wasteful with the quickloads though since the trip is not very conveniently repeatable will likely still do it this way."

    You really should read that and think very carefully about the path you are on. It's clear to me that this has become an obsession for you. That is very bad for good photography.


    "

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