Polaroid vs Panatomic-X
To the best of my memory Panatomic-X was never available in sheet film. Murals from roll film Panatomic were fine, but I don't think they equalled the Type 52 Polaroid; though you well may be correct that it was actually Panatomic.
Originally Posted by JBrunner
It wasn't produced as sheet film to my knowledge, but it is produced in large sized rolls (5.5 &9" wide) for aerial reconnaissance purposes, and you can cut 4x5 or 8x10 sheets from the respective roll. The rolls appear on that auction site from time to time.
Originally Posted by RJS
There is (or was) an effort underway for a special order here:
Can you please post this mp3?
Originally Posted by Q.G.
the rule of thumb that I've always come across when working on jobs as and assistant, as well as my own shoots, is: NEVER USE A POLAROID TO JUDGE EXPOSURE!!!
this is even with the newer fuji instant films, which IMO are much more accurate than the Polaroid equivalents of days past....
when I first started assisting, the first photographer I worked for told me this: "Use a polaroid to judge where your light will and or will not fall, NEVER to judge density or contrast because you'll always be wrong".
Now its been a year or two since this first job I worked on, but it still stays true: Find your personal rated speed for the film you're using (say a 100 box speed E6 film rated at 80).
I've always found and have learned with much success to back it up, that ALL color films (E6 and color-neg) should be exposed(the lighting ratios) within 1/2 - 1 full stop of each other. I have found this a terrific way of shooting, and even though this rule was developed back in the day when everyone was shooting transparencies where film had to go to pre-press, where you have a much shorter gamut of color and latitude than the film can actually handle. Its the same these days, even though the technology has improved. Film scanners that are available to the ~$1000 dollar mark crowd have much better capabilities to scan than the hi-end pre-press drum scanners of the 80's and early 90's.
My basic rule is: if you're using a studio flash, or even outdoor lighting, exposing that negative(color only in this case) or transparency right so that when you sc@n or print it, you have that 1 stop or less range.
If you have the chance, watch the Dean Collins dvd's on lighting, I have them and they are tremendous! He goes into "chroma-zones", or zone system for color photography. BEWARE: These films were done in the 80's so the long hair and funky clothing will bring back some memories . But the lighting is the same today as it was back then, albeit with some changes to style, etc... He shoots transparencies for most of the segments, being that they are all intended for print and reproduction(pre-press).
Also, on youtube, here's a video of him during a talk at Brooks back in the early 90's.
this is part 1, there are more if you care to watch.
he reccomends here to rate Ektachrome EPP(EI 100 BOX-SPEED) at 80, for a "hotter" transparency. This way shadow detail doesn't got to sh!+.
obviously, you have to test your films you use on a regular basis, and see where you want to place your exposure, and etc...
Personally for transparencies I usually use Fuji Provia 100f at asa80, or E100G at asa80 as well. This is in all formats 35mm-4x5(some 8x10 for personal work).
Color neg I use Portra 160vc(asa 100) and 400vc(asa 200) and portra 800(asa 400). I almost never blow out highlights, mainly due to using a split-nd filter when I can.
B&W is a completely different story altogether, and rarely its used on paying jobs, just personal work for me. Since most jobs don't want black and white files(no one really requires raw film anymore, just scans, mostly because of the "i'm giving you something tangible therefore I have to charge you sales tax on the entire job", therefore its easier to copy all the final files to THEIR hard drive, and you can pretty much bypass the sales-tax man <check your local tax laws though!!!!!>). that's the way it is here in So Cal.
Heck, just because I'm 21 doesn't mean I like spending time behind a computer fixing my scans(i hate that part personally).
I just like to do it right in the first place. D!gi+@1 is the same way, do it right in the first place, and you have less to worry about.
I shoot both, d!gi+@1 and film. Clients for the jobs I shoot(3 small editorial jobs so far, heck I'm in school right now ) don't care if I shoot film or d!gi+@1, just as long as they can get files withing 48hrs to choose their selects. I just take the film to the lab, they do some proof-scans and develop, etc, and I do my basic edits, and send it to them via fedex overnight.
But this if for a different thread.
Any questions anyone PM me and i'll do my best.
Many use that method but I say go Polaroid!
Helping to save analog photography one exposure at a time
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)