dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
So, after doing a little non-scientific "test" of Tri-X @ 3200 (refer to my previous thread located here at RFF ) and after re-reading a few folks online (specifically Merciful's thread also here at RFF and Sockeyed's info found in this thread over at PNet AND some general info found over at PhotoSig ) I decided to give it a try (-x) 😉.
Here's what I found (note that this little experiment is also completely unscientific) 😀:
TOOLS
I shot using my Bessa R3A and, usually, the collapsible Cron @ f2 (except where I could go a bit longer like f4 or maybe f5.6). I ran a roll of Tri-X (24) through the camera last night whilst at a local bar (had some karaoke going on) and I let the R3A do all the metering. Following the PhotoSig thread I decided to over expose the images by 1.5 stops.
DEV METHOD
I used the same method that's been discussed here and elsewhere: Rodinal 1:50 @ 68F (20C) for 51 Minutes with inversions every 5 minutes. Stop for 2 minutes. Fix for 2.75 minutes. Wash for 30 seconds. Hypo-Clear for 2 minutes. Wash for 5 minutes. PhotoFlo for a minute tops. Hang to dry 😀 Scanned via the Minolta Scan Elite II and adjusted the white point/black point via levels and resized - no sharpening done.
FINDINGS
The negs are extreeeeeeeeemely thin. They are "supermodel" thin. 😀 It was hard for me to make out the "cut points" on the negs when I was cutting them to sleeve them but after holding them up to the light a certain way it was a no brainer.
Even though they lacked any real details to my eyes (there were some noticable highlights/shadows) they did scan quite nicely. The grain is acceptable for 12,800 - but that's something I'm not so sure about - I find it's ok but is the grain itself solely created by the film structure or does the exposure/dev time etc. impact it as well?
Exposures were pretty much bang on EXCEPT for the fact that light sources in a dark bar will definitely throw off the internal meter. What I mean by that is, in last image I've posted here, there is a bright light coming from the upper left hand corner of the image. This was a TV set that was used to broadcast the words of the songs that people were singing out to the rest of the bar. When that TV was in the scene/shot it totally blew the exposure since the R3A is center weighted average (ya ya.. I know.. bottom LEFT weighted.. 😀). I've grown so accustomed to Canon's multi zone exposure that I think "meter = good = no problem in exposure". This, I feel, is a good thing. It makes me think more and more about the exposure of a shot when I learn stuff like this. The only thing I would do differently next time is be a LOT more aware of my surroundings regarding lighting. When you're in a low lit place, all it takes is one 100 Watt bulb in the frame to mess up an exposure if you're not thinking 😀
The images turned out quite good and I can seriously see using this film for uber low light photography - dimly lit bars, available light indoors (churches etc.) and places where flash photography is not allowed.
The Cron is sharp. I can't remember the last time I didn't apply some sort of sharpening to images I had scanned.
I've uploaded 3 images, all of my buddy Darcie (who was kind enough to be a guinea pig). The second image is slightly blurred - 1/8 second at f2 and she was moving.. go figure 😉. The first image I cropped for the amount of space I left above her head and the fact that there looked to be a pole growing out of her noggin 😀.
Cheers
Dave
Oh.. P.S. If you guys want to see the full size scans, don't hesitate to ask and I'll put them up on my site for download.
Here's what I found (note that this little experiment is also completely unscientific) 😀:
TOOLS
I shot using my Bessa R3A and, usually, the collapsible Cron @ f2 (except where I could go a bit longer like f4 or maybe f5.6). I ran a roll of Tri-X (24) through the camera last night whilst at a local bar (had some karaoke going on) and I let the R3A do all the metering. Following the PhotoSig thread I decided to over expose the images by 1.5 stops.
DEV METHOD
I used the same method that's been discussed here and elsewhere: Rodinal 1:50 @ 68F (20C) for 51 Minutes with inversions every 5 minutes. Stop for 2 minutes. Fix for 2.75 minutes. Wash for 30 seconds. Hypo-Clear for 2 minutes. Wash for 5 minutes. PhotoFlo for a minute tops. Hang to dry 😀 Scanned via the Minolta Scan Elite II and adjusted the white point/black point via levels and resized - no sharpening done.
FINDINGS
The negs are extreeeeeeeeemely thin. They are "supermodel" thin. 😀 It was hard for me to make out the "cut points" on the negs when I was cutting them to sleeve them but after holding them up to the light a certain way it was a no brainer.
Even though they lacked any real details to my eyes (there were some noticable highlights/shadows) they did scan quite nicely. The grain is acceptable for 12,800 - but that's something I'm not so sure about - I find it's ok but is the grain itself solely created by the film structure or does the exposure/dev time etc. impact it as well?
Exposures were pretty much bang on EXCEPT for the fact that light sources in a dark bar will definitely throw off the internal meter. What I mean by that is, in last image I've posted here, there is a bright light coming from the upper left hand corner of the image. This was a TV set that was used to broadcast the words of the songs that people were singing out to the rest of the bar. When that TV was in the scene/shot it totally blew the exposure since the R3A is center weighted average (ya ya.. I know.. bottom LEFT weighted.. 😀). I've grown so accustomed to Canon's multi zone exposure that I think "meter = good = no problem in exposure". This, I feel, is a good thing. It makes me think more and more about the exposure of a shot when I learn stuff like this. The only thing I would do differently next time is be a LOT more aware of my surroundings regarding lighting. When you're in a low lit place, all it takes is one 100 Watt bulb in the frame to mess up an exposure if you're not thinking 😀
The images turned out quite good and I can seriously see using this film for uber low light photography - dimly lit bars, available light indoors (churches etc.) and places where flash photography is not allowed.
The Cron is sharp. I can't remember the last time I didn't apply some sort of sharpening to images I had scanned.
I've uploaded 3 images, all of my buddy Darcie (who was kind enough to be a guinea pig). The second image is slightly blurred - 1/8 second at f2 and she was moving.. go figure 😉. The first image I cropped for the amount of space I left above her head and the fact that there looked to be a pole growing out of her noggin 😀.
Cheers
Dave
Oh.. P.S. If you guys want to see the full size scans, don't hesitate to ask and I'll put them up on my site for download.
Last edited:
