> Aeons ago I tried to work with PanF but it was pretty much a
> failure. I
> noticed the long, linear response in zones 3 to 5-1/2 or so,
> but got the toe
> and shoulders wrong. Out of curiosity, has the emulsion
> changed in the last
> 20 or so years? It gave me a siren song, but I couldn't sing
> along.
The tune is a bit tough to sing. PanF+ is a hard film to live
with and is not for those not willing to take the time to figure
it out. Once you've nailed it, it's fine, but getting there can
be tough.
Has the emulsion changed? Yes. It is now PanF+ (plus) and has
a much more forgiving shoulder and a hint of a color response
difference. I prefer Delta 100 for Zones VI-X, but PanF+ for
Zones 0-V.
> What is your workflow for PanF today? As you may recall, I
> was persauded by your praise of DD-X and it is now in the
>building ...
I use DD-X. Shoot and process at ISO 50 per the instructions.
The biggest problem I've experienced with PanF(+) is that my
oldest stuff (processed by a pro lab) has been fading!
AG
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|