Film and film developers
Aug 12, 2017 14:25:21 #
weedhook wrote:
The best 35m negatives I ever got came from Kodak Tri-X and Kodak Microdol-X diluted 1:3. Beautiful.
I used that combination at one time but found the once mixed shelf life of Microdol-X too short for my small volume of film. Diluting HC-110 straight from the concentrate gives years of use if the concentrate is kept refrigerated. But yes, larger grain. The Microdol-X can give almost "Plus-X like" negatives from Tri-X. But today day I do 95% digital anyway.
Aug 12, 2017 14:27:00 #
AzPicLady wrote:
So does that mean there is a Costco facility that still develops film? Anywhere?
Yes, most from what they tell me. I had a roll done two weeks ago in San Dimas, CA. I guess there is COMMERCIAL / BUSINESS False-News today too. I think I saw the incorrect story about Costco ending film development right here on the UHH. Can't believe everything you read. Again, the possible issue was regional at most.
Aug 12, 2017 14:44:29 #
rpavich wrote:
Check this out: he shot for a year and then took all of his film at once to costco
http://erickimphotography.com/blog/2015/03/23/what-i-learned-processing-164-rolls-of-film-after-waiting-a-year/
http://erickimphotography.com/blog/2015/03/23/what-i-learned-processing-164-rolls-of-film-after-waiting-a-year/
That is one odd photographer, holds shot film for a year. I guess a photographer who likes color shifts and fogging. One might get by with B & W like that.
Aug 12, 2017 15:54:27 #
cherylpeters wrote:
Who do you like the best for Film, and companies that develop film? Thanks in advance.
The best film developers, were from the manufacture! Why, because their balance was perfect! KodaK, was the best and most accurate ASA. Do you know what ASA stands for?
It stands for: American - Standard - Association. Do you know what ISO stands for? Industrial - Standard - Organization. FILM is a lot more complicated than digital. I never thought digital would replace FILM. But, it did, and, for the best . . .
Although, digital these days have a bigger advantage, and much more to offer, take away auto-focus, and you will loose at least, 80 percent photos shown or more. They would not even know which way to turn the lens to make a perfect sharp photo on manual. Think this is believable, yes it is!
There are more photographers these days photographing in digital, that would have a very hard time making it it film! My photos go back in film 1966-68 when I started in Viet Nam. The highest speed we had in B&W back then was 35mm 36exp film, Kodak TRI-X ASA 400 very accurate indeed! Any response is welcome . . . don't forget to show your photos! CIAO, AP
Aug 12, 2017 16:17:54 #
RWR
Loc: La Mesa, CA
cherylpeters wrote:
Who do you like the best for Film, and companies that develop film? Thanks in advance.
For color slides, 35mm & 120, I shoot Fujichrome Velvia 50 processed in Fuji Hunt chemistry.
For 35mm black and white I shoot ADOX CMS 20 II processed in ADOTECH II chemistry.
For 120 black and white I shoot Rollei (Agfa) RPX 25 processed in Rodinal diluted 1:50.
I do my own processing.
Aug 12, 2017 16:59:47 #
Aug 12, 2017 17:09:38 #
lamiaceae wrote:
Yes, most from what they tell me. I had a roll done two weeks ago in San Dimas, CA. I guess there is COMMERCIAL / BUSINESS False-News today too. I think I saw the incorrect story about Costco ending film development right here on the UHH. Can't believe everything you read. Again, the possible issue was regional at most.
Here in AZ (I think) all Costcos were forced to drop their film developing (even if it was still lucrative). The manager said it was ALL stores. Guess not.
Aug 12, 2017 17:12:05 #
lamiaceae wrote:
That is one odd photographer, holds shot film for a year. I guess a photographer who likes color shifts and fogging. One might get by with B & W like that.
The film was fine, did you read the blog post about why he did it?
Aug 12, 2017 18:27:12 #
Aug 12, 2017 18:38:51 #
rpavich wrote:
I shoot mostly Ilford HP5 or Kodak 5222 (Eastman double X) when shooting black and white. For color, I'm partial to either Portra 400 or Lomo 400 but I'll shoot just about anything.
For developing and printing I do it at home both color and black and white but if I send it out my color goes to Willow Photo Lab online They do real wet prints and develop/scan at reasonable prices.
For developing and printing I do it at home both color and black and white but if I send it out my color goes to Willow Photo Lab online They do real wet prints and develop/scan at reasonable prices.
Have you shot any Tri-X recently?
I'm wondering how Tri-X and HP5 compare.
Aug 12, 2017 19:47:50 #
Aug 13, 2017 00:05:39 #
rehess wrote:
Have you shot any Tri-X recently?
I'm wondering how Tri-X and HP5 compare.
I'm wondering how Tri-X and HP5 compare.
To me Tri-x is more harsh looking, HP-5 is more even but really, thats so dependent on how you shoot and process it, how you print it.
Aug 13, 2017 03:19:42 #
rpavich wrote:
The film was fine, did you read the blog post about why he did it?
Yes, sounded very eccentric. Serious mental issues. It is fairly common for artists to be crazy. Van Gogh and Syd Barrett come to mind. It is funny then, I can remember taking most of my images, many over thirty years ago. Should I have waited to edit them for fifty years?
Aug 13, 2017 03:26:38 #
lamiaceae wrote:
Yes, sounded very eccentric. Serious mental issues. It is fairly common for artists to be crazy.
Serious mental issues?
You read that, and you read his reasoning and what you got out of it is that he's got serious mental issues?
Wow.
Aug 13, 2017 03:28:58 #
rpavich wrote:
To me Tri-x is more harsh looking, HP-5 is more even but really, thats so dependent on how you shoot and process it, how you print it.
Interesting, I might have guessed so. Thanks.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.