>hmm, can you explain this a bit more? is this with every
>developer/film combo? say i have fp4+ shot at 125,
>shouldn't i look for 125 in the development chart of the
>various developers? (atm, i have neofin blue, i
>think i'm about to get some rodinal, whatever's cheap,
>i'm still learning :P)
Most developers "lose speed". This is why you see people always
rating thier 400 films at 320 or 200 or even 160. FP4 is
typically shot at 100 or 80. PanF at 32 or 25. By using a
developer, such as DD-X, you don't need to underrate your
films--just shoot them at the published ISO. I recommend
shooting at the published speeds unless you have a specific
reason not to.
Underrating films does give more shadow detail and sometimes
more luminous skintones, but may also skew the curves enough
that you will lose tonal seperation where you need it most. To
each his/her own, but I'd only change the rating of the film for
specific, quantifyable reasons--not because that's the way we've
always done it. Years of shooting slide films taught me to
trust the manufacturers.
Garth wrote:
>but for my money, DD-X used with Delta 100 may just be the
>best ------- developer/film combination in the history of the
>human race.
Well, I'm gonna say "it depends". I've found that D100/DDX has
a slight problem with tonal seperations in Zone II-III. Zones
IV-X are lovely! Grain is another issue too. Let's compare the
five major films from the Ilford stable:
PanF has extremely fine grain which is traditional in shape and
results in extremely smooth gradients even in the 20-24" print
size. Tonal scale is smooth and predictable. A very high
quality film that far exceeds tha capabilities of most Zuikos.
The base is clear and doesn't scan as well as the Deltas.
FP4 has a very sandy grain appearance. Nice tones--especially
skin tones. Probably the best B&W portrait film ever in medium
format. Produces extremely contrasty negatives. The density is
much greater than other films in the stable. In my opinion,
it's a lousy film for landscape work because of the grain's
attitude.
HP5 is now what Tri-X is supposed to be. I'm very partial to it
processed in DD-X 1:9. Grain is traditional, but less ornery
than FP4. Like FP4 and PanF, it has a clear base that doesn't
scan as well as the Deltas.
Delta 100. Ooo. What a film. The grain is larger than PanF,
but the resolving power is better. The grain is similar to TMAX
which means that it tends to enhance edge-definition at the
expense of the core. I know, these are fine points, but when
blown up to 20x24" from a 35mm negative, you will find that the
D100 will look sharper (than PanF), but the grain in large
expanses of constant tone (sky) will not look as natural. If
the picture has lots of texture, Delta 100 beats everything out
there. Extreme ability to hold detail. When photographing
something like fabric, normal grain will alias somewhat where
Delta 100 does not. Unfortunately, the film tends to bleed
highlights a little, but this is a common fault with most Ilford
films. This film is NOT a traditional film in grain or tonal
scale. It has a damaged toe, but the shoulder is linear right
up near the Dmax. Massive amounts of tonal seperation in the
highlights.
Delta 400. I'm a true believer. This is my general purpose B&W
film of choice. I can't think of a single weakness. Resolving
power is almost as good as Delta 100. I find that it scans the
best of every B&W film I've ever used. Grain is tight, natural
and predictable. If Ilford made it in 4x5 I wouldn't shoot
anything else. Tonal scale goes off the chart. Both deltas work
best with diffusion enlargers. Has something like 1/2 stop more
straightline section than TriX/Hp5.
Where Kodak modifies the film line to decrease manufacturing
costs, Ilford modifies the film line to improve the film.
Sorry, o' yeller, but there's a new sheriff in town.
AG-Schnozz
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|