Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,690   Posts: 1,482,381   Online: 740
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson View Post
    A couple of developers that will give you sharp grain are Rodinal, HC-110, Ilford Ilfosol-3, Tetenal Neofin Blau.

    Plus-X reminds more than a little of Tri-X but with finer grain. If you like Rodinal, get some more of it. It's great with Plus-X and will give you a bit of grain. But a 120 neg from Plus-X has to be enlarged quite a bit before it gets obviously grainy no matter what developer you use. Its grain is actually quite fine.

    As an ad hoc comment. Try Fomapan 400 and shoot it at EI 100 or EI 160. That enables you to stop down 1.5-2 stops and get the out of focus qualities you like. The film can handle it, and you'll get lovely negs. That film needs more exposure than most other ISO400 films I've tried to get any shadow detail, and plenty of grain. Since you're overexposing the grain will be enhanced a bit too. Looks fantastic in D76.

    - Thomas

    Plus- then you will be supporting a manufacturer who admits that making film is part of thier business model, unlike the folks who run Kodak, who just wish we would all go away. Foma rules!

  2. #12
    IloveTLRs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Switzerland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    988
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by applesanity View Post
    Is Plus-X even popular here?
    I've switched to Plus-X for just about the exact same reasons. Tri-X is my favorite 400 film, but now that the days are brighter I can't open my lenses up. I also don't want to go to an ND filter because I use quite a few different cameras with different lenses; I'd have to buy about 20 of them :rolleyes:

    I shoot Plus-X at 100 or 125 (sunny 16) and develop it in HC-110 dil B. I'm very happy with the results I don't pay attention to temp, which I probably should ...

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Moorpark, California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    124
    Where does it say that Kodak wishes us to go away?


    Quote Originally Posted by ghost View Post
    Plus- then you will be supporting a manufacturer who admits that making film is part of thier business model, unlike the folks who run Kodak, who just wish we would all go away. Foma rules!

  4. #14
    MikeSeb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Prospect (Louisville), KY, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,062
    Quote Originally Posted by ghost View Post
    Plus- then you will be supporting a manufacturer who admits that making film is part of thier business model, unlike the folks who run Kodak, who just wish we would all go away.
    Would that be the same Kodak that, within the last couple of years, has showed its disdain for its film-buying customers by improving its Portra color negative film line and its T-Max 400 B&W film; by introducing an entirely new and--by all accounts--exceptional 35mm color negative film; and by offering that film in 120 to boot?

    This sort of statement is tiresome and, frankly, idiotic. If you like Kodak's products, buy them. If you think Fuji or Ilford makes a superior product, buy that instead. Did Kodak discontinue your pet product? Get over it. It's not about YOU. The marketplace speaks louder than puerile statements on online forums.

    Assailing a manufacturer for failing to "support" the [in many cases money-losing] products you like, then boycotting them when they do, is irrational and childish.
    Michael Sebastian
    Website | Blog

  5. #15
    BradS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    S.F. Bay Area, California
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    3,921
    What Mike said!

  6. #16
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,985
    Images
    279
    Ditto what Mike says.

    Kodak is second to none in my view. Their films and chemistry are top notch with quality control that is incomparable. I don't think I've ever had problems with a Kodak roll of film, and they have, as Mike says, tried to improve existing emulsions and even introducing new films in a declining market. That takes guts.

    Foma films look lovely, but when you use them you will run the risk of all sorts of problems. Overly optimistic ISO rating, coarse grain (which I like, but others don't), 120 film that curls like a spring and it's blue in color which can make it deceptive to judge them on a light table, I get pinholes in the emulsion (on rolls that were developed in the same tank as Kodak and Ilford rolls that did not have them)...
    But if you like your film to exhibit lots of grain it's the cat's meow, and it does indeed have a wonderful look to it tonality wise.
    "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

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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