Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,592   Posts: 1,546,023   Online: 1001
      
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 57
  1. #11
    jd callow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Milan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,002
    Images
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Rose View Post
    Besides Art's obvious copyright infringe which is a separate matter, I believe the reasons for Rogers departure have nothing to do with reference to his website made by him or anyone else.
    Roger left of his own accord after it became apparent that he wouldn't be able to advertise for free. He admitted as much, and I'm sorry and surprised that he doesn't admit it to others. I guess I figured him to be bigger than he actually is.
    Last edited by jd callow; 05-10-2008 at 11:25 PM. Click to view previous post history.

    *

  2. #12
    Eric Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Calgary AB, Canada
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    4,257
    Images
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by jd callow View Post
    Roger left of his own accord after it became apparent that he wouldn't be able to advertise for free. He admitted as much, and I'm sorry and surprised that he doesn't admit it to others. I guess I figured him to bigger than he actually is.
    Umm, I figured it had more to do with the way in which Roger chose to communicate with members. I stand corrected.
    www.ericrose.com
    yourbaddog.com

    "civility is not a sign of weakness" JFK

    "The Dude abides" - the Dude

  3. #13
    jd callow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Milan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,002
    Images
    117
    That probably contributed to the quantity of people that reported his advertising.

    *

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    1,159
    Quote Originally Posted by sanking View Post
    And for that reason I think Sean was right to set the matter straight. If you leave people free to speculate wildly no telling where the conversation will go.

    From another perspective, I have also reviewed the new TMY-2 film (article in View Camera) and compared it to the old film. I did find an improvement, but frankly when I read the review by Roger and Frances I felt that we were comparing two different films. I say that with special note to their comment about the way the two films recorded tonal values. My tests, curves and prints showed almost no difference at all in terms of the rendition of tonal values.

    Sandy
    Sandy: Did you have to change any of your devloping times with the new film, i.e., in 4x5, were the film curves similar? Am I wrong....didn't you post some of your data on APUG a few months back?

    Thanks.

    Ed

  5. #15
    df cardwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Dearborn,Michigan & Cape Breton Island
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,342
    Images
    8
    "If I hadn't learned how to give a Two-Hander,
    I would never have got out of Flin Flon."

    ............................................. Bobby Clarke.

    .
    .
    .

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Mahler_one View Post
    Sandy: Did you have to change any of your devloping times with the new film, i.e., in 4x5, were the film curves similar? Am I wrong....didn't you post some of your data on APUG a few months back?

    Thanks.

    Ed
    Ed,

    I tested the new and old T-MAX 400 fillm in 120 and 4X5 sheet film size. With 120 I don't do BTZS testing so I would not be able to say for sure that the curves are identical. However, I exposed identically one roll of the new T-MAX 400 and one roll of the old T-MAX 400 film and developed them together in Pyrocat-HD. The new film had slightly less contrast than the old. The new film definitely appeared to be finer grain with slightly better resolution than the old.

    I compared the new and old T-MAX 400 films in 4X5 with BTZS testing, exposing with a sensitoimeter. I developed the film in D-76 1:1. I read the densities and plotted the curves with Winplotter. The two families of curves are almost spitting images of each other, with the exception that in this case, contrary to my tests with 120 film, the new T-MAX 400 developed contrast just a tad faster than the old versoin of the film.

    My conclusion is that if you already have reliable development information for the old film with a given developer you are probably safe to just apply that data to the new film.

    Sandy
    Last edited by sanking; 05-11-2008 at 09:18 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  7. #17
    Dinesh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,583
    Quote Originally Posted by df cardwell View Post
    "If I hadn't learned how to give a Two-Hander,
    I would never have got out of Flin Flon."

    ............................................. Bobby Clarke.

    .
    .
    .

    I'll bet Kharmalov wishes he had stayed home in '72
    Kick his ass, Sea Bass!

  8. #18
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,244
    Quote Originally Posted by df cardwell View Post
    "If I hadn't learned how to give a Two-Hander,
    I would never have got out of Flin Flon."

    ............................................. Bobby Clarke.
    D'ja hear about the guy who went online to see a fight and a photography discussion broke out?



    Lee

  9. #19

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    San Diego, California
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    70
    The new 400 film was the first time I've ever shot 400 by Kodak; I'm new to B&W so I have no idea how this film used to behave.

    I still just don't get it's. It's really blotchy in D76; I almost feel as though I ruined a shoot/session of street photography by relying on this film (then again, I was out testing it, ostensibly). The new Kodak 400 is still not as flexible as anything from Fuji, and it's not quite as romantic as an Efke (or Kodak's own 125 PX, which is also blotchy but in more artistically pleasing ways). A salesman at a local photography store (Nelson's in San Diego) told me that the Kodak film is more suited for enlarging, not scanning (all I ever do is scan).

    In short, I just don't get it. Am I missing something? Is the new 400 totally awesome in Rodinal or Pyro or something? Or are there others who feel the same way I do, that TMY2 is insufferably blotchy and makes for a muddled visual statement? I realize there might be those who prefer/choose this film; I'm just wondering if I'm not the only person who feels as though the film's quirks work against them, rather than with them.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    San Diego, California
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    70
    Also, is it just me, or does Shutterbug wait months and months and months before reviewing a new film? I got my first issue via subscription from them when they wrote their first review of the new Velvia 50; as I recall the new Velvia had been out for almost six months already.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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