Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,206   Posts: 1,531,805   Online: 843
      
Page 11 of 16 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213141516 LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 155
  1. #101
    Art Vandalay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Vancouver BC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    287
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by hansbeckert
    Actually, all developers provide this effect, but some more than others.
    Rodinal certainly does it well. Even though I'm not always pleased with the grain there is something about Rodinal that grabs your attention.

  2. #102

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    141
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Art Vandalay
    Rodinal certainly does it well. Even though I'm not always pleased with the grain there is something about Rodinal that grabs your attention.

    But this is true with virtually all non-solvent developers. That's all I'm trying to say.

  3. #103
    Aggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    So. Utah
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,925
    Images
    6
    No what you are doing is attacking rodinal. Evidenced by every single recent thread dealing with it you come on and blast it.
    Non Digital Diva

  4. #104

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    141
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Aggie
    No what you are doing is attacking rodinal. Evidenced by every single recent thread dealing with it you come on and blast it.
    Hmmm...no. I'm simply trying to say it's not all it's cracked up to be, and that its popularity has more to do with its cheapness and longevity than its image charcteristics.

  5. #105
    Art Vandalay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Vancouver BC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    287
    Images
    3
    And all I'm saying Hans is that there's something that I like about the way Rodinal develops my films. I'm not always happy, because of the grain, but when it works well it shows. I don't use it often and had no information on it before I started. I certainly didn't use it because it had a cult status because I had never heard of it.

    Aggie, I think you have Hans figured out pretty well

    PS if you want to have one of the most frustrating evenings of your life just ask Hans if he thinks photography is art.

  6. #106

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    141
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Art Vandalay
    PS if you want to have one of the most frustrating evenings of your life just ask Hans if he thinks photography is art.
    Please, don't ask me that.

  7. #107

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    141
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Art Vandalay
    And all I'm saying Hans is that there's something that I like about the way Rodinal develops my films.
    Have you used any other acutance-type developers? Rodinal does look good UNTIL you compare it to the others in the same product category.

  8. #108
    Aggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    So. Utah
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,925
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by hansbeckert
    Have you used any other acutance-type developers? Rodinal does look good UNTIL you compare it to the others in the same product category.
    If you are such a Know it all, Why can't you get the hint that no one is going to change because you are going on more and more ignore lists. Soon you will be talking and posting to just yourself.

    Most I know who study philosphy also know enough to recognize people are different therefore going to do different things. I personally like PMK and HC 110. Becasue of you I would never try a developer you have endorsed.
    Non Digital Diva

  9. #109
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by hansbeckert
    I still don't follow you. The methodology is clearly stated. Whatever you're try to say, it has nothing to do with this test or with 'science'. I am a philosophy major and I do well understand the scientific method.
    The methodology is poor. That's all *I'M* tyring to say.

    You understand the "scientific method"??? So far from what I've seen --- you don't. You are sure fooling me ...

    Let's see ... I have no valid criteria - so I'll squint at a few negatives, projected on a screen ... I'll give this one --- oh ... a "3", that one a "2" ... that one a "3" ... and then I'll average all these values, and get 2.8560340563. That's a LOT of decimal places, so it must be "accurate." Yeh, right ...

    *SUBJECTIVE* That means "Not Scientific". What does it take to get through to you??
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

  10. #110

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    141
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Aggie
    If you are such a Know it all, Why can't you get the hint that no one is going to change because you are going on more and more ignore lists. Soon you will be talking and posting to just yourself.

    Most I know who study philosphy also know enough to recognize people are different therefore going to do different things. I personally like PMK and HC 110. Because of you I would never try a developer you have endorsed.
    I endorse:

    D76
    Microdol-X
    Xtol
    DK50
    DK60
    D61a
    PMK
    FX-1
    FX-2
    FX-3
    FX-4
    FX-5
    FX-5a
    FX-7
    FX-8
    FX-9
    FX-10
    FX-11
    FX-15
    FX-18
    FX-37
    FX-39
    Acutol
    Rodinal
    Ultrafin
    Neofin
    Atomal
    D-1
    ID-68
    ID11
    Microphen
    Perceptol
    Ilfosol
    DDX
    HC110
    Polydol
    Acufine
    Diafine
    UFG
    TEC
    FG7
    TG7



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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