Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,561   Posts: 1,545,291   Online: 762
      
Page 1 of 14 123456711 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 139
  1. #1
    Jeffrey A. Steinberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Scarsdale, NY
    Posts
    296

    Just replaced all Kodak Chemistry with Ilford

    I finally did it. I figured if Kodak got rid of paper, I am going to back a company that is fully servicing us B&W traditionalists.

    I am also trying their Tri-X equivalent but I think I might be buying Tri-X for a while.
    --Jeffrey

    ______________________________________________
    Jeffrey Steinberg, K2MIT
    Scarsdale, NY

    www.jsteinbergphoto.com (my avocation)
    www.reversis.com (my vocation)

  2. #2
    BradS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    S.F. Bay Area, California
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,056
    Images
    1
    you do realize that your rationale is completely irrational - right?

  3. #3
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,290
    Images
    20
    Ilford makes two fine 400 speed films, but they aren't really "Tri-X equivalents." HP-5+, Delta 400, Tri-X, and for that matter TMY, Neopan 400, and Fomapan 400 are all different films with their own distinctive looks. Shoot whatever is attractive to you.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  4. #4
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,033
    Images
    65
    To be exactly rational and logical, you would have to use Kodak film developers that you previously used and use their fixers, but never at a paper dilution. And, of course, to fully flesh this out, you could never use any Kodak color film or paper. If you are going to do it, do it right and with enough forethought to prevent this kind of nit picking.



    PE

  5. #5
    david b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    None of your business
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,034
    Images
    30
    At this point, I am using what ever is the cheapest chemistry.

  6. #6
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,276
    Images
    148
    To Nit Pick, actually Ilford make 3 400 speed films - David forgot XP2

    Luckily there are still a number of manufacturers left so you could make superb images quite happily if you want to totally stop using Kodak, but then Kodak remarkably for the last few years have slightly better B&W films than Ilford at least with Tmax100 & 400, others would add TriX.

    So you have to compromise somewhere.

    Ian

  7. #7
    Jim Noel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,846
    Blog Entries
    1
    ALthough I am as upset as anyone about Kodak's actions, I can not be this picky. I use HP5+ because I like it better than Tri-X, not because of Kodak actions.

    I use some Kodak chemistry, some from Ilford, but basically make my own most of the time.
    [FONT=Comic Sans MS]Films NOT Dead - Just getting fixed![/FONT]

  8. #8
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,033
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by david b View Post
    At this point, I am using what ever is the cheapest chemistry.
    David;

    Do you use cheap chemistry or inexpensive chemistry. Not to put too much into this, there have been several threads on cheap chemistry.



    PE

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    south central Missouri
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,927
    Images
    9
    I understand and like posts about products based on there properties and qualities, knowing evreyone has a different taste. But, darn if I fully understand why these types of threads belong anywhere but in the lounge.

    It's like I'm using Company A products because Company B did us wrong, how is that going to help any of us make better prints?

    Mike

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    south central Missouri
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,927
    Images
    9
    Ron,

    I agree with cheap and inexpensive being different. While I'll not stop using Tri-X in 120, I did decide I had to try a brick of EFKE 120 to see what it was about.

    I had more than my fair share a QA issues in ten rolls, so much so, I that I gave the rest of the brick away. I know others have shot hundreds of rolls wilth no issues.

    Mike

Page 1 of 14 123456711 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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