Reading mode: Light Dark

Digital overtaken film thread

Go to last post
to purchase my film (B&H) and am now using Mpix to process my film. I've been happy with them, the negs coming back clean with a minimum turnaround time. It's certainly not like it used to be.
 
cshess said:
to purchase my film (B&H) and am now using Mpix to process my film. I've been happy with them, the negs coming back clean with a minimum turnaround time. It's certainly not like it used to be.
Click to expand...
Check out freesyle for B&W...awesome selection and decent prices!
 
Roger Krueger said:
Mark Smith said:
Kodak demonstrated a super fast mono neg film a couple of years back, I think ISO 25,000 it has failed to reach the market.
Click to expand...
The stuff that you had to iron rather than soup? Yeah, I was pretty heartbroken when that ended up stillborn.
Click to expand...
Why not try Ilford Delta at 25,000 processed in DDX or Microphen on 120 gives an Ok result not dissimilar to TMZ on 35mm



and also with lighting courtesy of just a laptop on the ebay page at 1m



No light really, more like D700 territory, but I like pushing.
 
Roger Krueger said:
Yeah, I've shot D3200 and TMZ at big pushes too, but my assumption was that this vunderfilm was genuinely high ISO, not just an ISO 1250 designed to be push-friendly.



http://www.flickr.com/photos/36669754@N00/776301280/

6x9 D3200 pushed to EI 25,000, worked over with Grain Surgery (RIP) in post. These days I'm tempted to start over with the original scan and leave the grain in!
Click to expand...
Leave the grain in Roger....like the old saying goes...."That's grain...it's supposed to be there."
 
Roger Krueger said:
Yeah, yeah, I've shot D3200 and TMZ at big pushes, but my assumption was that this vunderfilm was genuinely high ISO, not just an ISO 1250 designed to be push-friendly.



http://www.flickr.com/photos/36669754@N00/776301280/

6x9 D3200 pushed to EI25,000, worked over with Grain Surgery (RIP) in post. These days I'm tempted to start over with the original scan and leave the grain in!
Click to expand...
that's a nice shot. When I talked to Ilford engineers they informed me that D3200 is a 1000 ISO film that has a unusually low contrast. I find EI 6400 to be the sweet spot for me, I normally use a speed increasing developer like Microphen, Ilford told me DDX was a better choice.

Recently (well over the last year or so) I've been playing with Rodinal and D3200 to give tight sharp grain rather than the less grainy softer look I get with Microphen.
Here is D3200 at EI6400 in Rodinal with reduced agitation.



I have been trying different dilution and agitation in order to get a good result, I still haven't perfected it but this winter I'll crack it.
 
Mark Smith said:
.
Here is D3200 at EI6400 in Rodinal with reduced agitation.



I have been trying different dilution and agitation in order to get a good result, I still haven't perfected it but this winter I'll crack it.
Click to expand...
I loved rodinal it was my favorite b and w developer for years yah you could see the grain but the image was sharp sharp and I was shooting a lot of medium format at the time so the grain wasn't all that bad. I also loved the tonalities I got with rodinal especially in the shadows--
bosjohn aka John Shick [email protected]
 
Dave Luttmann said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
What 2 electron says about the "sad state of film" is that it's even sadder than we thought...

The cine division of Kodak developed the two electron sensitizing film, and it took years for it to migrate from there to the still photography side of Kodak. The still photography business used to drive film development.

And we're just in time to see the bottom drop out of cinema.

There are 140,000 screens worldwide. Putting together data from the DCI and Cinema Buyer's Guide
That's 60% per year growth

100% of theaters should be digital by 2014.

I'd say that's about as long as the color film business (still and cine combined) at Kodak and Fuji has got. It will take a lot more time for color film to totally die, folks like Lucky are going to go on for quite a while...

But I think we've seen the last technological advances in film, and we're just five years from being thrown back a decade or two in technology.
Click to expand...
This could very well be true. Glad I like B&W better ;-)
Click to expand...
Same here.

Even better, there seems to be a tolerable eastern European replacement for my favorite, Tech Pan. Now that stuff is seriously "old school". Kodak just took note of how many people were using the old "Kodak High Contrast Copy Film" (and Agfa Copex microfilm) in a phenidone developer, whipped up their own pnenidone developer, and rebranded HCCF as "Technical Pan".

Some say "Gigabit" and "Bluefire" actually are AGFA Copex, others say it's a really good imitation, but you can't argue with the results. And that's an emulsion over 1/2 century old.

(I learned about Harold Holden and Arnold Weichert "Control" developer when I was around 12. Aaron Sussman (Susmann?) talked it up glowingly in "The Amateur Photographer's Handbook". You could renew a book every two weeks indefinitely at the Livonia Public Library, unless someone put a hold on it. I kept that book checked out for the entire summer of 1974).

Now, what was this about me ruining every thread?

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
Dave Luttmann said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
What 2 electron says about the "sad state of film" is that it's even sadder than we thought...

The cine division of Kodak developed the two electron sensitizing film, and it took years for it to migrate from there to the still photography side of Kodak. The still photography business used to drive film development.

And we're just in time to see the bottom drop out of cinema.

There are 140,000 screens worldwide. Putting together data from the DCI and Cinema Buyer's Guide
That's 60% per year growth

100% of theaters should be digital by 2014.

I'd say that's about as long as the color film business (still and cine combined) at Kodak and Fuji has got. It will take a lot more time for color film to totally die, folks like Lucky are going to go on for quite a while...

But I think we've seen the last technological advances in film, and we're just five years from being thrown back a decade or two in technology.
Click to expand...
This could very well be true. Glad I like B&W better ;-)
Click to expand...
Same here.

Even better, there seems to be a tolerable eastern European replacement for my favorite, Tech Pan. Now that stuff is seriously "old school". Kodak just took note of how many people were using the old "Kodak High Contrast Copy Film" (and Agfa Copex microfilm) in a phenidone developer, whipped up their own pnenidone developer, and rebranded HCCF as "Technical Pan".

Some say "Gigabit" and "Bluefire" actually are AGFA Copex, others say it's a really good imitation, but you can't argue with the results. And that's an emulsion over 1/2 century old.

(I learned about Harold Holden and Arnold Weichert "Control" developer when I was around 12. Aaron Sussman (Susmann?) talked it up glowingly in "The Amateur Photographer's Handbook". You could renew a book every two weeks indefinitely at the Livonia Public Library, unless someone put a hold on it. I kept that book checked out for the entire summer of 1974).

Now, what was this about me ruining every thread?
Click to expand...
Wrong Joe, Joseph. When we all talk about Joe, it's not reference to you. It refers to Ludwig100 & Yuzooskar....who have been banned before as Joe Lavee and Digserv.

As to B&W, I think you're referring to Adox CMS 20 film. 35mm grain free at 48"....nice tonality. Work trying using their developer....trust me!
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
Click to expand...
 
Interesting compiliation, but probably a very accurate assessment.
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
What 2 electron says about the "sad state of film" is that it's even sadder than we thought...

The cine division of Kodak developed the two electron sensitizing film, and it took years for it to migrate from there to the still photography side of Kodak. The still photography business used to drive film development.

And we're just in time to see the bottom drop out of cinema.

There are 140,000 screens worldwide. Putting together data from the DCI and Cinema Buyer's Guide
2007 - 4,000 screens were digital
2008 - 6,300 screens
2009 - 12,000 screens
2010 - 17,000 (projected)

That's 60% per year growth

100% of theaters should be digital by 2014.

I'd say that's about as long as the color film business (still and cine combined) at Kodak and Fuji has got. It will take a lot more time for color film to totally die, folks like Lucky are going to go on for quite a while...

But I think we've seen the last technological advances in film, and we're just five years from being thrown back a decade or two in technology.
Click to expand...
 
The last time I developed a roll of film other than at a 1 hour lab (and it was years ago).. they lost my film. Yup, gone, with no recourse. Since then it's been all 1-hour, taking the hit on quality, choosing to go with something rather than nothing.

What I did get back was someone's trip to Disneyland. I took it back, don't know if the owners ever got their pics back, never saw mine :(
 
At an office portrait a few years ago I made a comment to the photog that she was still shooting film (it was medium format). Boy did I get an earful about how she will always shoot film and how it's so superior. Never made another comment like that again, and I didn't even mean anything by it!
 
RedFox88 said:
... slide film provides reliable, repeatable color capture.
Click to expand...
Does it, though?

What about when the light source varies (outdoor mid-day, sunset, then indoors artificial light?) I think digital has the advantage there. But I don't know, I never shot slide film. Maybe there's some developing trickery that goes on.
 
Undah said:
At an office portrait a few years ago I made a comment to the photog that she was still shooting film (it was medium format). Boy did I get an earful about how she will always shoot film and how it's so superior. Never made another comment like that again, and I didn't even mean anything by it!
Click to expand...
I wonder if she's still shooting film?

If I went back to film, I'd go back to stainless steel tanks and reels, use a changing bag and mix my own chemicals. One of the main reasons I stopped doing my own film developing was advancing arthritis, so I might have to go plastic and use those so-called easy-winding reels.

--
Charlie Self



http://www.charlieselfonline.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Neokinoooooos
Replies
1
Views
2K
simple-joy
simple-joy
Phocal
  • User review User review
OM SYSTEM M.Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm f/2.8 IS PRO Initial/Ongoing Review
2 3 4
Replies
69
Views
31K
Hmm1000
H
B
Kracking Kromars.
Replies
2
Views
1K
Bosun Higgs
B
Bristolero
Down a Rabbit Hole with Mom and Dad--Vintage Lenses on the Feeder
Replies
4
Views
650
D Cox
D
B
The King of the Ernostars
2
Replies
31
Views
6K
T-Rex Mark
T

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top