News From HARMAN technology Limited :

[Simon R Galley]

Dear StoneNYV

The 35mm market far outweighs the 120 and sheet film market, it always has done. I think what you say is spot on for APUGGERS.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

[StoneNYC]

Dear StoneNYV

The 35mm market far outweighs the 120 and sheet film market, it always has done. I think what you say is spot on for APUGGERS.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

Oh wow, I am wrong then, you would know either way it's smart to invest in the cassettes to ensure no manufacture down time.

Keep at it!


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

[madgardener]

If Ilford keeps up this level of support, I might have to take another look at Ilford film. I tried Ilford HP5+ for my photography class a couple years ago and found it was really grainy (like looking at a photo with sand on top of it). My supply of Legacy Pro is running out, and I am looking for a replacement. The FP4 looks promising, as does the PanF.

[StoneNYC]

If Ilford keeps up this level of support, I might have to take another look at Ilford film. I tried Ilford HP5+ for my photography class a couple years ago and found it was really grainy (like looking at a photo with sand on top of it). My supply of Legacy Pro is running out, and I am looking for a replacement. The FP4 looks promising, as does the PanF.

They are pretty solid, perhaps the developer you used at the time wasn't good for the film?

I just received an email from them today on an issue I found on their site, very nice people, solid company, devoted, I used to want to say "oh I shot on this and this" and wanted to hit all the films that might go away soon, and then I realized I was just getting inconsistent results because I wasn't devoting to a product line to learn and perfect it. Ilford is obviously the current leader in B&W and by leader I mean only profitable company, so even if its not EK it's still in the black, so that's the more solid bet. Their film is really great. I laugh because everyone talks about grain but not as much about (gah!!! I can't spell the word!!! And auto correct doesn't know what I'm trying for....) ACUTENCE (sp?) I found recently that though Acros was a finer grain than HP5, the comparative images looked sharper on HP5 because the edge detail wasn't as blurred. I used DD-X so perhaps Acros responds to Fuji developer better, but even HP5 I would pick in normal light over Acros, I use Acros for night exposures only.

It's all what you use.

Also how long ago was this? Remember ilford now has PLUS on all their films, the improved versions...


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

[wblynch]

Ilford's Delta 100 is supposed to be very similar to Acros. You might give it a try.

[StoneNYC]

Ilford's Delta 100 is supposed to be very similar to Acros. You might give it a try.

With a 2 minute reciprocity failure rate? I think not... Lol, if I need a low ASA I use Pan F+ the only need for 100ASA for me is the night stuff usually. Nothing can beat that rate...


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

[madgardener]

They are pretty solid, perhaps the developer you used at the time wasn't good for the film?


It's all what you use.

Also how long ago was this? Remember ilford now has PLUS on all their films, the improved versions...


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

Ok, I cut a lot of this post out, but in general to answer the questions, the class I took was 3 years ago. The school was using the Sprint brand of chemicals, which wasn't too bad. Its when I tried developing at home that the grain was really bad. I was using Arista developer (just the regular stuff). I still have a couple rolls in the freezer and intend to try it again with some HC-110, and see what happens.

[Roger Cole]

If you need ISO 400 and HP5+ is too grainy, try Delta 400 if you want to use Ilford.

All Ilford films that I have used have been excellent. I use FP4+ and Pan F+ regularly in 120, and D3200 occasionally.

[StoneNYC]

Ok, I cut a lot of this post out, but in general to answer the questions, the class I took was 3 years ago. The school was using the Sprint brand of chemicals, which wasn't too bad. Its when I tried developing at home that the grain was really bad. I was using Arista developer (just the regular stuff). I still have a couple rolls in the freezer and intend to try it again with some HC-110, and see what happens.

I would try DD-X. Seems to give very nice sharp grain.

http://www.apug.org/gallery1/showima...mageuser=59230

That's HP5

If you aren't a subscriber you can't use the link... So... Be a subscriber!! Lol

Or just see this instead.



It's a long exposure which should introduce more grain and its pretty non-grainy.


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

[Roger Cole]

Is that from medium format as the square appears to be? It would take a pretty grainy film to show grain in that display resolution from medium format. Heck, I have Delta 3200 negatives, shot at 3200, that hardly show any in that size. Not saying you aren't right, just that it isn't going to mean much in viewing that image.