OK, maybe a slight exaggeration, but...
I finally got around to developing most of the B&W film from the Colorado
trip. Still a couple rolls to go plus another dozen rolls of other
stuff....
But anyway, the Colorado trip was shot on Fuji Neopan 100ss. I purchased a
bunch of rolls from B&H for $1.99 each. An unbelievable price. I was a bit
nervous about it all, though, because I had no clue what was going to come
out of it all.
The negs, developed in DD-X, appear to be quite lovely. The contrast and
tonality is similar to FP4 with a typical "old-school" grain. I'm not sure
yet what it will do on paper, but from what I can see it should do just
fine. I was thinking, then, that I should order up enough rolls to keep me
in cotton for a few months...
To B&H I go and what do I see? "Discontinued". Bummer dude.
I have a philosophical problem with spending $5.50 on a roll of 36-exp B&W
when I can buy Provia less expensively. I'll have to dig around to see what
else I can find or possibly find another source or this film that Fuji
killed off years ago, but occasionally makes batches of for distribution in
limited markets. It's a shame I never discovered this film earlier, but
it's also a shame that it was never made available in the USA except through
specialty importers.
My attitude towards B&W has changed. Long gone are the days of trying to
make grainless prints. Yes, I can with PanF up to 8x10, but Digital is the
way to go, I guess, if grain-free blob-o-matic prints is what you are
after. I'm more interested now with B&W that looks like B&W instead of who
can get the cleanest prints. There is more to life than that.
So, now that I've found something I like, I can't get anymore of it. Go
figure.
I'll have to check into that movie-film stuff that I can bulk load. For
certain work, Ilford films will remain my mainline usage, but I'm wanting a
good experimental film that is dirt cheap. If it gives me a classic look
that Digital can't replicate--all the better.
As an example of how cheap--my loaded costs for Neopan 100ss is eight cents
per shot. It would be less than that, but I use DD-X at 1:4, single-shot.
If I went to 1:9 dilution, I could cut my costs down below seven cents per
shot. If I used D76 and replenished, I could knock another cent off. But
I'm not THAT tight.
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|