Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,808   Posts: 1,581,496   Online: 1074
      
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 34

Thread: Mmmm Plus-X

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Westport, MA.
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,063
    I don't know much about anything these days but I think that the price difference is due to the lack of demand for Plus-X. It will probably go the way of Verichrome pan eventually, sooner than later. It's a beautiful film, perfect with Microdol-X (do they still make that? I used to buy it in a glass bottle and i'm not that old..)

    eh. i'll keep my mouth shut next time. :/

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Sarasota, FL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    921

    You are "That old."

    Quote Originally Posted by Phillip P. Dimor View Post
    I don't know much about anything these days but I think that the price difference is due to the lack of demand for Plus-X. It will probably go the way of Verichrome pan eventually, sooner than later. It's a beautiful film, perfect with Microdol-X (do they still make that? I used to buy it in a glass bottle and i'm not that old..)

    eh. i'll keep my mouth shut next time. :/
    I THINK my only use of Microdol X is about 1965. and I THINK it was in an envelope. But then again, what I THINK often does not jibe with reality......

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Downers Grove Illinois
    Posts
    1,053
    It is indeed a beautiful film, one of my favorites. I have trouble scaninning it though.

    I take Delta 100 and Plus X. Both print on #2 paper with a condenser enlarger. The Delta scans easily and I get a low cotrast scan. The Plus X is worse than scanning slides. Tri X scans fine to.

    I don`t understand.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,789
    Images
    2
    Interesting. I've had no problems scanning my Plus-X. What do you develop in and what do you scan with?

  5. #15
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,549
    Images
    300
    I have recently discovered Plus-X and I like what I see so far. I develop it in Xtol 1+3 or Pyrocat-MC and both have given me great results. I have printed them on all kinds of paper and I am delighted to say the least. Great tonality, very sharp, and a nice looking grain. I too think of it as a less grainy Tri-X.

    I haven't tried scanning it yet, but I'm interested in hearing from Ronald and others what level they take their scanning to. I usually just do it for proofing so I know what to print in the darkroom, but on occasion I push my scanner to the limit. What kind of problems are you
    seeing? What is it about the scans that you don't like compared to Delta 100??

    Thanks,

    - Thomas
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,789
    Images
    2
    I scan pretty thoroughly when I have a good shot. Nikon Coolscan V at 4000 dpi. I use Vuescan, get a nice scan with no highlight or shadow clipping, and then do some curves/levels in photoshop. I've really had no issues with Plus-X and scanning...

    I develop in XTOL 1:1 for Kodak's given times if it makes a differences.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    413
    Excellent film! A favorite for work in studio. In D-76 1+1. Yet to find a better developer for it.

  8. #18
    bowzart's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Anacortes, WA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,219
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Verizzo View Post
    I THINK my only use of Microdol X is about 1965. and I THINK it was in an envelope. But then again, what I THINK often does not jibe with reality......
    I'm pretty sure it came canned. You used it about when I did.

  9. #19
    bowzart's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Anacortes, WA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,219
    Images
    15
    I used plus-x in the 1960's, developed in Rodinal, and was shooting with an uncoated Zeiss Sonnar on a Contax II. Printed one of those negatives a few months back. There is a quality about that image that would be very hard if even possible to achieve now. I wonder how the film has changed. Anybody know?

    Besides the great scale, the grain was really beautiful. And, coated or not, that Sonnar is hard to beat. Using Rodinal, which gives an emphasis to the linear elements and value boundaries, the quality of the glass actually is visible to the eye. I loved it. Maybe I'd better buy some!

    One thing that MAY keep plus x in production is the fact that it is also a movie film. Whether the movie film is the same as the camera film is another question, but Kodak calls 'em both Plus X. The movie film version is available in short rolls from Film Emporium. Of course, movie films don't come with numbered frames, which is a pain. In the movie roll ends, it is very inexpensive, something like 18 cents/ft. I've been using the Double X, which I like very much. It has a bit more pronounced grain than Plus X.

  10. #20
    Rlibersky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    St Paul MN
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    777
    Images
    12
    Plus-x has been my favorite film for years. I cried for days when I accodently exposed my last box of 8x10 to the darkroom light. Even now it brings atear to my eye.

Page 2 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