Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,714   Posts: 1,483,037   Online: 786
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    141
    Images
    3
    KB14 is orthopanchromatic: intermediate between ortho and pan. It's that simple. A red filter will work, but the exposure increase will need to be a bit more than for typical pan films.

  2. #22
    mikewhi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Redmond, WA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    808
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by hansbeckert
    KB14 is orthopanchromatic: intermediate between ortho and pan. It's that simple. A red filter will work, but the exposure increase will need to be a bit more than for typical pan films.
    What is KB14? I don't recognize that as a brand..

    Thanks.

    -Mike

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    141
    Images
    3
    EFKE 'F' 'K' (FotoKemika, Yugoslavia) licensed the old Adox (Germany) formulas after Adox went out of business and sold their coating equipment to duPont to coat litho film. In other words, Efke 25 is the same product as the old Adox KB14. KB is German for 'Kleinbild' or what in English is 'miniature' or 35mm film. '14' is the old DIN speed number. KB14 was ASA20, not 25. KB17 was ASA 40, and KB21 was ASA100. I used all of these films 35 years ago. The only one worth a damn was KB14. The 40 speed and 100 speed films were very grainy for their speeds, and KB14 was not as sharp as Panatomic-X, though slightly finer-grained than the Kodak film. I quit using KB14 after a few years and starting using Ilford FP4 much more when it came out in 1969. The old DIN numbers are now the degrees in the ISO speeds.

    DIN=ASA/ISO
    14=20 (Adox KB14)
    15=25 (Kodachrome II)
    16=32 (Panatomic-X after 1964)
    17=40 (Panatomic-X before 1964)
    18=50/64 (Agfachrome CT18)
    19=64/80
    20=100 (Adox KB21)
    27=400

  4. #24
    mikewhi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Redmond, WA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    808
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by noseoil
    Mike, if you run out of film, do you buy more and then run out of wine? This is sort of like chocolate sauce and ice cream.

    "Opps, I ran out of ice cream and have too much chocolate sauce left in the bowl, so I added ice cream. Now, I've run out of sauce for the ice cream so I'll have to add more and, oops, I'm out of ice cream again so...."

    Still want to see the Efke 25 and 25 red filter prints when you get them done. I'm wondering if the filter is the hot tip for cutting down contrast for better control with this flashy beast of a film.
    Hi!

    1) I NEVER run out of wine.
    2) There is no such thing as "too much chocolate sauce". Just slurp what's left in the bowl then go get a refill of BOTH ice cream and choco sauce. Yes, you can have it all.

    Here are some digital pictures of some of the EFKE 25 negatives developed in Rodinal. They are blurry, sorry, but they do show the contrast of the negs. My densitometer reads a DR of exactly 1.35, which sounds good for Azo. I'm looking forward to printing them. Some lack of local contrast in the foreground of the shots in the hills, but maybe some bleach can help that out.

    I'll develop the TMAX 100 negatives next and post some pics of them, too.

    For both, I gave a +3 stop exposure for the Red #25 filter.

    -Mike

  5. #25
    noseoil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Tucson
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,898
    Images
    17
    Mike, they seem to have plenty of detail to work with. Of course the proof is in the pudding, but it would seem that they will certainly print well enough and hold a full range of values. tim

  6. #26
    mikewhi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Redmond, WA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    808
    Images
    9
    I agree. But while there is a lot of overall contrast, the local contrast in the 2 main areas (sky and foreground) isn't that great. I was hoping or more density in the sagebrush patches in the one on the far left and far right. When I looked thru the red filter they really popped out but don't show up with a whole lot of extra density in the negatives. I am pleased with the amount of detail in the foreground. With all this talk about this film, I was worried that the foreground would be almost blank. The one in the middle is especially pleasing with all the detail in the trees and rocks on the left! The real negative is really great in this area - I'm looking forward to printing that one.

    I'll be sure to post more negatives and prints as I move along. The weekend is coming up and I'm sure I'll get a lot done, perhaps even all the remaining negatives. (It sure helps to have a motor drive on the 5x7 and 8x10).

    -Mike

  7. #27
    mikewhi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Redmond, WA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    808
    Images
    9
    Preliminary results are in and it looks like a photo (get it?) finish between the EFKE 25 and TMAX 100 as far as the effects of the #25 red filter. I gave both the same extra exposure (3 stop more than indicated). The TMAX negs are in the washer now and I'm running another 6 thru the JOBO as I write. I'm processing the TMAX negs in Rodinal, too, as I screwed up the first batch in the Pyrocat-HD. (it was either the developer, the developee or the wine - at least I don't recall dumping Zinfadel into the JOBO).

    I'll take some more blurry pictures of the TMAX negatives when they're dry and post them.

    Then, we can all break open a bottle of wine and have a judging party, ok?

    Love and Kisses,
    -Mike

    BTW, I am drinking wine, eating fine smoked oysters and listening to the great Renee Olstead as I process film. How good can a low-carb lifestyle be, huh?
    Last edited by mikewhi; 10-31-2004 at 02:04 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  8. #28
    mikewhi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Redmond, WA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    808
    Images
    9
    OK, all the 5x7's are done! Thank goodness for JOBO. On to the 8x10's - I have no idea how many of those I have to do, but it's not as many as the 5x7's. At any rate, all I need are the 5x7's to compare per the topic of this thread. The negs will dry overnite and I'll post some pics of them tomorrow. I know you are all breathless with anticipation.

  9. #29
    mikewhi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Redmond, WA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    808
    Images
    9
    Got some 8x10's done. It was AGFA APX 100 film, dated 01/97! No fog - they look awesome. They will make lovely contact prints, I do believe. Developing them in Rodinal 1:50 for 13 minutes and the highlight densities look right on the money. Lots of detail in the shadows, too. Should be done with all negatives later today.

    -Mike

  10. #30
    mikewhi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Redmond, WA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    808
    Images
    9
    Well, the washer is full of film and it's hissing away. I've had 1.5 bottles of wine, 3 tins of smoked oysters, listened to: Renee Olstead, Heart, Led Zeppelin, Sissel Kyrkjebo, Tony Bennett & k.d. lang, Cyndi Lauper and Matt Dusk. All that and I've barely used any Rodinal concentrate. That would be 10 8x10's and probably 30 5x7's processed tonight - Rodinal is amazing. I am it's slave. Next, PhotoFlo hang 'em up and hit the sack.

    I'll post the 5x7 TMAX negs to compare to the EFKE ones as soon as I can for those interested.

    'Nite, Mike.
    'Nite, John Boy!

Page 3 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