Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 73,613   Posts: 1,622,749   Online: 851
      
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 32
  1. #11

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    7,320
    I'll speak for myself but I suspect I speak for all of us who were on the recent Ilford tour when I say I was highly impressed by the trouble and care taken by Ilford in its dev and printing service and at an amazing price. Few labs do B&W on B&W paper these days and having seen B&W on RA4 paper, there is no comparison.

    If I didn't have a darkroom and/or needed a fast reliable professional service, I'd certainly use Ilford. I can't quite work out how they do it for the price. The phrase putting its money where it's mouth is in terms of intent and execution springs to mind.

    pentaxuser

  2. #12
    ted_smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    uk
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    396
    Images
    1
    Interesting stuff.

    I have never used Ilfords processing, or HARMAN technology. Will have to try both. The lab I used was 'The Darkroom' based in Chelmsford, UK. I have been very impressed with their productions to date, service and turn around times, which is why I assumed it was the film (not being that experienced at using FP4).

    They were shot on a Nikon F80 in a hospital ward mostly with about 50% of the light coming from a window on the far side of the ward. The rest was flurescent bulb light. Most shots where shot wide open(ish) - f2.8 or f4 without flash. The ISO was kept at the film ISO rating which was 125 I think.

    Ted
    Ted Smith Photography
    Hasselblad 501CM...my 2nd love.

  3. #13
    Bosaiya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Sumner, Washington
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    410
    I shoot a ton of NP400 for location work in which the goal is gritty realism. I develop in Rodinal and find the results sharp as razors, the look is very nice and everyone is pleased. I also have found that it is not appropriate for all occasions. I used some for portraits by mistake and they came out looking like mugshots, whereas a softer film looked more appropriate.

    Quote Originally Posted by ted_smith View Post
    Hi

    Just shot a couple of rolls of Fuji Neopan NC 400 of my new baby girl and good lady wife. Also shot a role of Ilford FP4 alongside.

    Nothing against the Ilford FP4 - a great versatile film, but oh my - compared to the Neopan - the results of the Neopan was amazing. Really dark blacks, and really bright whites. The Ilford, by comparison, looked quite pasty and 'washed out'. If I just had the prints from the FP4 on it's own I'd not have noticed probably, but getting the Neopan results at the same time, and knowing that all rolls were shot in the same light, has given me a lot of faith in that film. I have just ordered a new batch to keep me going (http://www.silverprint.co.uk/Product...asp?PrGrp=2224)

    Ted

  4. #14
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,245
    Some folks are understandably (given the naming and limited availability) confusing Fuji Neopan 400CN, a chromogenic C41 film, with Neopan 400 standard B&W film. As Rolleijoe pointed out, it may be a UK only product.

    Just thought I'd post this for folks who haven't read the whole thread.

    Lee

  5. #15
    Bosaiya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Sumner, Washington
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    410
    Whoops, indeed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee L View Post
    Some folks are understandably (given the naming and limited availability) confusing Fuji Neopan 400CN, a chromogenic C41 film, with Neopan 400 standard B&W film. As Rolleijoe pointed out, it may be a UK only product.

    Just thought I'd post this for folks who haven't read the whole thread.

    Lee

  6. #16
    ted_smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    uk
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    396
    Images
    1
    Some folks are understandably (given the naming and limited availability) confusing Fuji Neopan 400CN, a chromogenic C41 film, with Neopan 400 standard B&W film.
    I would be interested to know under what circumstances someone would choose the C41 version over the B&W version. Is it a grain thing? Which is better for B&W work (which is what I like to shoot a lot of)
    Ted Smith Photography
    Hasselblad 501CM...my 2nd love.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    509
    Out of curiosity, which model frontier are you using? And how did you get around the cartridge replenishment system? External mix tanks?


    Quote Originally Posted by Simon R Galley View Post
    Dear All,

    An interesting thread, mostly about the processing, at HARMAN I guess you know we are passionate about printing mono films on mono papers, so many D&P houses now print onto colour so we put our money where our mouth was and now offer our own service, proper processing, C41 mono as well as normal mono and printing using a converted FUJI Frontier ( with the great help and support of FUJI ) onto our monochrome paper. The results I think are unbelievable.....this is not an ADVERT for the service, just to say that we are
    doing a lot of work in 2009 to encourage specialist D&P and Labs around the World to look at the system.

    Its going so well we plan to widen the range of services this year.


    Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

  8. #18
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,245
    Quote Originally Posted by ted_smith View Post
    I would be interested to know under what circumstances someone would choose the C41 version over the B&W version. Is it a grain thing? Which is better for B&W work (which is what I like to shoot a lot of)
    The image structure in the negative is different. Both produce a monochrome negative, but the traditional negative has silver grains remaining in the negative, whereas the C-41 negative is formed by tiny dye clouds that remain after the silver is removed.

    One reason for using the chromogenic C-41 film is that it can be processed and printed at a local one hour color negative lab. It can also be printed with your own traditional B&W darkroom setup and materials at home. At the one hour labs, it will be printed on regular color paper, but come out monochromatic (perhaps with some overall color tint if your lab isn't well calibrated).

    The advantage of the traditional B&W film is that you can choose your chemistry and development parameters to suit your taste and preferences.

    The grain will be different. The C-41 will likely appear smoother, without the "edge" of traditional emulsion grain.

    Which is "better" is up to you.

    Lee

    BTW, my lab has no problem taking my traditional emulsion 35mm B&W negatives and doing very nice, neutral 4x6 prints for me on their Fuji Frontier.
    Last edited by Lee L; 11-07-2008 at 10:11 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Valley Stream, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,216
    Quote Originally Posted by ted_smith View Post
    I would be interested to know under what circumstances someone would choose the C41 version over the B&W version. Is it a grain thing? Which is better for B&W work (which is what I like to shoot a lot of)
    Comes in handy when you don't have access to a pro lab that handles traditional B&W films, or if you don't have the facilities or desire to process your own B&W. All the monochrome C-41 films perform better than their traditional B&W counterparts when scanned. If scanning for electronic output, for printing via inkjet printers at home, or for printing at the local 1 hr. minilab onto RA-4 papers, the results can easily be dramatically better than the results to be had from traditional B&W films. Ilford's XP2 Super is not only very good for all the reasons I've already mentioned, it also, unlike its competition from Kodak, delivers excellent results in a traditional B&W darkroom when printed onto variable contrast or graded papers. Kodak's monochrome C-41 offerings are not designed for this sort of application, but does deliver excellent results when printed onto RA-4 materials.
    Frank Schifano

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    London, UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    457
    Quote Originally Posted by ted_smith View Post
    Interesting stuff.

    Most shots where shot wide open(ish) - f2.8 or f4 without flash. The ISO was kept at the film ISO rating which was 125 I think.
    Sorry to butt in, but I think any problem with the FP4 may be resolved by the quote above. A 400 film shot in lighting conditions where it is necessary to shoot at f2.8, will give far better results than a film which is a lot slower. Perhaps you have been expecting too much from a 125 ISO film shot indoors?

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