Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,748   Posts: 1,515,693   Online: 944
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 30
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    601
    http://www.forte-photo.net/h/sf200.htm

    Forte 200 is the same film as Classic and Bergger.

  2. #12
    NER
    NER is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Davis, California
    Posts
    78
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by jandc
    http://www.forte-photo.net/h/sf200.htm

    Forte 200 is the same film as Classic and Bergger.
    I was under the impression that Bergger Products, Inc. and Forte Photochemical Co. Ltd were separate and unrelated business concerns with no corporate relationship. I believe, but do not know for a fact, that "Classic" is made by either Fotokemika d.d.(Croatia) or Adox Fotowerke, Inc. (Canada). Can you clear this up for me? Here is the Forte link in English: http://www.forte-photo.net/e/sf200.htm

  3. #13
    argentic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Echandelys, Auvergne, France
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,709
    It seems that Bergger has it's paper made by Forte following Bergger formulas. The films simply appear to be the same. At least packaging and notch code are. I'm about to test these seemingly different emulsions to see what's the truth.
    Wilbert
    http://www.photovergne.com
    Cours photo en Auvergne

  4. #14
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,136
    Images
    20
    NER: J&C is the distributor for the Classic films in the U.S., so that info is from the source. I've corresponded with Mirko at fotoimpex, which is the European distributor, and he has also confirmed that the ClassicPan (the European version) films are manufactured by Forte, and not Efke or Adox. To further confuse matters, while Classic/ClassicPan 200 may be the same as Fortepan 200, New Classic/ClassicPan 400 is not the same as Fortepan 400, though Forte makes both of them.

  5. #15
    NER
    NER is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Davis, California
    Posts
    78
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by David A. Goldfarb
    NER: J&C is the distributor for the Classic films in the U.S., so that info is from the source. I've corresponded with Mirko at fotoimpex, which is the European distributor, and he has also confirmed that the ClassicPan (the European version) films are manufactured by Forte, and not Efke or Adox. To further confuse matters, while Classic/ClassicPan 200 may be the same as Fortepan 200, New Classic/ClassicPan 400 is not the same as Fortepan 400, though Forte makes both of them.
    The source said 80 lines/mm, however, Forte claims that the resolving power of its film is 85 lines/mm: a discprepancy of 5 lines/mm is not one I am likely to see with or without glasses and I am not concerned by the small difference. Maybe I'm approaching my problem from the wrong direction. Let me explain why I posed this question in the first place. I ventured down this path because I am considering a switch to Efke PL 100, which is said by its manufacturer to have a resolving power of 90 lines/mm. I like BPF 200 for several reasons, but despite using it for some time, do not know its resolution rating. Comparing the resolving power of the two emulsions and evaluating my results from BPF 200 would, I reasoned, give me one indication of what to expect from PL 100 and would be a more objective and reliable indicator than looking at the results obtained from PL 100 by other photographers and posted on the internet, some of which are very impressive. My interest in completing this evaluation would not be as high were not for the fact that PL 100 is considerably more expensive than BPF 200. 25 sheets of 8x10 BPF 200 is $60 at Bostick & Sullivan, while 25 sheets of PL 100 is $109.99 at JandCPhoto. That's my story. Bergger has not yet responded to my inquiry.

    [I stand corrected on the price charged by JandCPhoto (see below). JandC's price is for 50 sheets, not 25.]
    Last edited by NER; 08-02-2004 at 05:27 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    965
    Images
    58
    no longer hijacking this thread

  7. #17
    NER
    NER is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Davis, California
    Posts
    78
    Images
    1
    Because I may like it more than BPF 200.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    965
    Images
    58
    no longer hijacking this thread

  9. #19
    gma
    gma is offline
    gma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Texas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    793
    Images
    9
    I think it would be very difficult to tell the difference between 80 and 90 lines per mm.in the negative. Paper can resolve only 30 or so lines per mm and unless you are examining your enlargements with a loupe I do not understand your concern.

  10. #20
    lee
    lee is offline
    lee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth TX
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,913
    Images
    8
    while 25 sheets of PL 100 is $109.99 at JandCPhoto.

    I think you need to check the JandC Photography website again. Looking at the website, tells me that the Efke is packaged as a 50 sheet box. There by making it about $54.99 per 25. That compares favorably to the BPF 200 from the Bostick and Sullivan company.

    I have no interest in JandC Photography other than wanting to see the company succeed.

    lee\c

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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