Arista EDU Ultra 100; Anyone try this?

charjohncarter

charjohncarter

Veteran
Local time
6:58 AM
Joined
Dec 3, 2006
Messages
10,179
I know, at least, I think 'fishtek' has tried this film. I have shot two rolls now both rated at 50, but one developed for 9.5 minutes and the other 8.25 minutes(everything else is the same). Scans on two scanners have produced contrasty images with all the information or most of it at both the dark and light ends of the histogram. The only images that were close were those exposed in very low contrast situations. Any ideas or suggestions.:bang:
 
FWIW I love this stuff. I use it in 120 and in my experience it produces gorgeous negs and wet prints. I shoot at an EI of 100 and soup in Rodinal at 1+50 for 10 mins at 20C. This is what I arrived at after doing zone testing, and it's what works for my Beseler with a condensor head.

Maybe you need to run an exposure and development test. The one I use is on the 'From Zone to Tone' website.

Kent
 
Thanks for your answer, but after two rolls of this stuff and looking at other posts on the web (all the 120 look good) I am beginning to feel that 35mm is a different film than 120mm Arista Edu Ultra 100. My results look more like copy film (I can not remember the name of the Kodak copy film, but that is what it looks like). I do not think my development numbers and technique is off by that much. I would be willing to test, but this is just too far off the scale. I have also accessed 35mm Arista Edu Ultra 100 photos in the 35mm format on different websites and they look much like mine. An example is 'fistek's image on this RFF forum (film, scanning and development), if you copy it and put it on your PS levels you will see what the histogram looks like. I like 'fishtek's image but I do not want a whole roll that is all white and all blacks.
 
I shoot with the 200 sometimes, and it is contrasty too. I stopped using it for that reason. It was contrasty if I developed it OR if the lab did.

Now I use Neopan. Yummy.
 
I've shot one roll of the 120 dev'd in rodinal 1+50 20 min agitate every 5. good range of tones. I've seen the 35mm have good tones online. I unfortunately don't have any to point to on hand.
 
Try some stand development with rodinal. I got some mid-contrast images that way with the 200 version of the film... somewhere between 16 and 20 minutes, one minor agitation every few minutes.

Or diafine. I use the 200 version in it at ei100 and get some creamy results with tones.
 
Thank you 'fishtek,' I put your image on the histogram and it is better, but it is still too flat (not contrast but histogram) for me. If someone has a real (e.i. good histogram negative in 35mm), please show it. I actually like 'fishtek's images, but they do not have the midtones and the lack of 'zone I,II,II or too much zone VI,VII for me
 
FWIW, this is Arista EDU Ultra 100 shot at EI 200 and developed in Diafine.

Not taken with an RF, though - I'm kind of between working RFs. It's a Canon FTb w/ FD 24mm/2.8 lens, scanned as a color positive with a Scan Dual III and then channel mixed to monochrome, curved and slightly sharpened in the GIMP.
 

Attachments

  • Congress Park Tree.jpg
    Congress Park Tree.jpg
    75.9 KB · Views: 0
Yes, now that is better 'fishtek' I hope that you enjoy Arista Edu Ultra 100. dagabel, it is hard to tell if this is 'a situation that is made for Arista Edu Ultra 100.' but for this subject it looks very good. It seems to me that Arista Edu Ultra 100 is made for high contrast subjects or low contrast subjects, somewhat like copy film with one of those developers that tries to expand tones.
 
Last edited:
According to Kaiyen, it's Foma film. There are seemingly Ilford films re-badged as Arista, but NOT the EDU Ultra. It doesn't matter to me who made it, as long as the stuff is available, cheap, and works for me.

Regards!
Don
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom