Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,703   Posts: 1,548,471   Online: 869
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    306
    Images
    26
    I use HP5 almost exclusively. Years back I tried the delta films and found them to be a little sharper, but almost impossible to handle due to film curl (120 size). They were also quite a bit more expensive at that time. I went back to the HP5 and have stayed with it. For me, it was an easy decision.
    Don Sigl
    www.drs-fineartphoto.com

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,670
    T-max/Delta emulsions have less exposure latitude than conventional ones. This is due to the fact that the grains are more homogeneous in size.

  3. #13
    percepts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sceptred Isle
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    263
    Quote Originally Posted by MMfoto View Post
    All things being equal, they do give you a point of reference to compare with other films/developers.
    I disagree. From personal experience I know that the published characteristic curves are less than accurate. I would not put any reliance on the published curves. This is not a reflection on the product which I think is excellent, but the data sheets are lacking in accuracy and as I have already said, you will never reproduce those curves anyway.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Kansas
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    103
    Images
    7
    The manufacturer's published data suggest FP4 has more exposure latitude. Is that something one ought to believe?


    Quote Originally Posted by percepts View Post
    I disagree. From personal experience I know that the published characteristic curves are less than accurate. I would not put any reliance on the published curves. This is not a reflection on the product which I think is excellent, but the data sheets are lacking in accuracy and as I have already said, you will never reproduce those curves anyway.
    duane

  5. #15
    eddym's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Puerto Rico
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,927
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by don sigl View Post
    I use HP5 almost exclusively. Years back I tried the delta films and found them to be a little sharper, but almost impossible to handle due to film curl (120 size). They were also quite a bit more expensive at that time. I went back to the HP5 and have stayed with it. For me, it was an easy decision.
    That was pretty much my observation about Delta 400, too. It was nice, but certainly not worth paying more than I pay for HP5+. Of course, I think HP5+ is REALLY GOOD film!
    I do like Delta 100, though.
    Eddy McDonald
    www.fotoartes.com
    Eschew defenestration!

  6. #16
    percepts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sceptred Isle
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    263
    Quote Originally Posted by couldabin View Post
    The manufacturer's published data suggest FP4 has more exposure latitude. Is that something one ought to believe?
    the ilford delta films hit the shoulder sooner than traditional films but what do you mean by latitude. You can have a film which can capture 14 stops or more but have you ever tried making a decent print from a neg which is that dense. You may be able to pull it back with the right development but again we are talking extremes here. The vast majority of scenes are well within the range of the delta films and if you are exposing very high contrast subjects then you should be testing your films to such an extent that any data in the data sheets is virtually irrelevant and the development contraction required to pull the film back will significantly alter the charactistic curve so what relevance does the data sheet curve have? And that assumes that what is printed in the datasheet is correct which is not a safe assumption.

    Do your own testing to be 100% sure of what the films limits are.

  7. #17
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,281
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by percepts View Post
    ... You can have a film which can capture 14 stops or more but have you ever tried making a decent print from a neg which is that dense. ...
    I have, several times. The negatives aren't dense, just long. Maintaining a decent tonal separation in the midtones without blowing the highlights or blocking the shadows is fairly easy with lith printing.

    Scenes with 14 to 17 stops are far more common around here than you'd expect. FP4+ does a great job in these cases.
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

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