Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,677   Posts: 1,481,991   Online: 842
      
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 43
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Shooter
    Plastic Cameras
    Posts
    1,028
    Why do you need film that fast? Are you photographing moving subjects?

  2. #12
    23mjm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Rocklin, California
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    450
    Images
    9
    HP5+ pushes nicely to 1600 in a variety of soups. I have done it in 35mm and 120 and it ain't too bad so in 4X5 it shouldn't be a problem at all. The only way you are going to know is if you give it a try. I normally develope in Ilford DDX FWIW

  3. #13
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,079
    Images
    20
    I did some experiments with XP-1 and found I could get an honest 2-stop push with TX, a little less with TXT (this was before TXP sheet film came out). You could probably do a little better with HP-5+. Contrast was too low for my purposes, though it would have been good for night photography, which tends to be a high-contrast lighting situation. There is an article with two possible formulas for XP-1 at unblinkingeye.com.
    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. #14
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,939
    If you could get by with a 6x9 or 6x12 back you could use Ilford 3200 in 120 format. It has an ISO of 1000.

  5. #15
    Marco B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,983
    Images
    169
    Thanks all for the suggestions!

    The reason I was looking for something like ISO 1600 is a kind of madmen's project: shooting night time pinholes of illuminated buildings with an ultrawide 4x5 pinhole camera...

    I have had some preliminary results with about 40 min exposure that showed some promise, but the negs are thin. I did not really push develop though, and did not pre-flash the film. I will give it a try with HP5 and see what I can come up with... and possibly see if I can buy some of that Rollei stuff with the High Speed developer.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    205
    At 40mins surely recipricity failure is a far bigger issue than ISO? Get some film data sheets - I'd have a look at using acros.

  7. #17
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,079
    Images
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by m_liddell View Post
    At 40mins surely recipricity failure is a far bigger issue than ISO? Get some film data sheets - I'd have a look at using acros.
    I'd agree with that. TMY or TMX would also be good possibilities. TMX is probably faster than HP5+ at that exposure time.
    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

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Saugerties, NY
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,159
    Images
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by Marco B View Post
    Thanks all for the suggestions!

    The reason I was looking for something like ISO 1600 is a kind of madmen's project: shooting night time pinholes of illuminated buildings with an ultrawide 4x5 pinhole camera...

    I have had some preliminary results with about 40 min exposure that showed some promise, but the negs are thin. I did not really push develop though, and did not pre-flash the film. I will give it a try with HP5 and see what I can come up with... and possibly see if I can buy some of that Rollei stuff with the High Speed developer.

    you may find that the reciprocity of the faster films make them slower than 100 speed films when used at long exposures.

    i shoot 4x5 pinhole also. i have found that tmax100 and acros100 are very very fast when you are doing long exposures. give this a try. you may be surprised.

    eddie
    photoshop is somewhere you go to buy photo equipment.


    lens photos here

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    (Frigid) Ottawa, Ontario
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    52
    Wowzers! Does that ever bring back memories!!

    I haven't used sheet film that fast since 1976, when I photographed a church interior on Kodak Royal-X Pan film, which had a box speed of ISO 1250 (formerly known as ASA 1250). As I recall, Kodak gave instructions on pushing the film to ISO 4000, when operating under flat lighting conditions; if memory serves, it called for a 50% development time increase in DK-50.

    Interesting, but no help. However, I do recall reading somewhere about how you can push film by exposing the underexposed, but normally developed film, in an airtight chamber, to the fumes of hydrogen peroxide, heated to a temperature of about 100F. I have never seen any info online about this procedure; I will search my printed records at home this weekend. If I can find the original article (from about 1973, I think), I'll drop you a PM.

    I have also tried the preflashing route, without much success. I tried that when I was in university, in second year sensitometry class. I couldn't get it to work properly, as it requires an extremely low level of light to activate the film, without fogging it. I wrote a lab report on my project (and got a B+; not bad for a failed experiment!), but ultimately, the results led me nowhere.

  10. #20
    Marco B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,983
    Images
    169
    Quote Originally Posted by m_liddell View Post
    At 40mins surely reciprocity failure is a far bigger issue than ISO? Get some film data sheets - I'd have a look at using acros.
    I already took reciprocity into account to some extent, but clearly not enough. For HP5, it would probably require something like 2-4 hours exposure (more likely 4 considering the negs). Although I am a patient guy (at least when I want to ), that stretches my patience to the limit (hence the question for 1600 ISO).

    I have been using Ralph Lambrecht's pinhole dial (http://www.darkroomagic.com/ under "Library") in combination with a conventional film reciprocity table to come up with some sort of estimate. However, it may indeed be better to resort to modern TMax emulsion, as that same table Ralph supplied also shows TMax doing much better in this respect.

    Can someone confirm that TMax really is that much better at long exposure times? (e.g. indicated / measured 4 min. translates to 14 min. for TMax 400 and 30 min for conventional according to Ralph's reciprocity table)

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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