ZeissFan
Veteran
If you want to try a nice b/w film, give Adox CHS a test. It's very silver-rich emulsion, dries flat and scans easily, although it has a tendency to attract dust and should be handled with a bit more care than other films.
Here's a writeup of a Zeiss Ikon SL 706 that includes photos taken with Adox CHS 100.
Adox took over production of Rodinal, Neutol and Agfa's b/w enlarging papers.
I like the Adox CHS film a lot, and it's available in 120 and sheet, as well.
It's a good time to be a film photographer. There are still a lot of choices of different emulsions available.
Here's a writeup of a Zeiss Ikon SL 706 that includes photos taken with Adox CHS 100.
Adox took over production of Rodinal, Neutol and Agfa's b/w enlarging papers.
I like the Adox CHS film a lot, and it's available in 120 and sheet, as well.
It's a good time to be a film photographer. There are still a lot of choices of different emulsions available.
bagdadchild
Established
Any chance they resurrect Agfa color films?
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Well, it seems that at present the Agfa films are mainly offshoots of their film production for other markets, not dedicated products for photographers. They have some aerial colour films as well. Maybe someone is repackaging them as well, but I wouldn't expect too much from them, at least you'd get strange colours (because of different spectral response for aerial films)
sepiareverb
genius and moron
I'd qualify this with 'B&W'. Color seems much less of a sure thing to me these days, especially if one wet prints.
I emailed and asked about the potential for APX25 to return, but haven't heard back yet. Just printed some old negs on 120 APX25 run in HC-110b yesterday, and was bowled over all over again by the tonality. Stunning stuff.
HHPhoto
Well-known
Hi Phillip,
We have to be fair: All film manufacturers are doing it this way, without exception.
Ilford replaced FP4 by FP4+ and HP5 by HP5+. Ilford Delta 400 had two emulsion changes without name change, one in 1994, one in 2000.
Kodak replaced Tri-X by a modified Tri-X in 2003 when they moved the whole BW film production to Rochester. The film get finer grain and new development times, no name change at all.
Same with T-Max 400: New film with new characteristics, same name. Portra film revisions the same.
In all these cases the films were to such an extent changed, that you as photographer had to test them again and get familiar with their new characteristics.
It is common practise for all film manufacturers to do only small or no name changes when new emulsions are introduced.
If you criticise this practice, you have to criticise all, not only one company.
You have started it, not me
.
Yes, I agree, worst of it are the stupid guys like cmo, F.S.B; J.B. etc at sw-magazin.de. Ridiculuos people, ridiculuous discussions.
I am using films from Kodak, Ilford, Fuji, Agfa/Rollei-Film, Spur, Foma, Freestyle, Adox, Lucky.
I love to experiment with different emulsions and film characteristics. Every manufacturer has strong films in his programme.
And I am happy about every company on the market offering film products for us.
It doesn't interest me much which name is on the box. If the film is good I am happy.
Cheers,
Jan
We have to be fair: All film manufacturers are doing it this way, without exception.
Ilford replaced FP4 by FP4+ and HP5 by HP5+. Ilford Delta 400 had two emulsion changes without name change, one in 1994, one in 2000.
Kodak replaced Tri-X by a modified Tri-X in 2003 when they moved the whole BW film production to Rochester. The film get finer grain and new development times, no name change at all.
Same with T-Max 400: New film with new characteristics, same name. Portra film revisions the same.
In all these cases the films were to such an extent changed, that you as photographer had to test them again and get familiar with their new characteristics.
It is common practise for all film manufacturers to do only small or no name changes when new emulsions are introduced.
If you criticise this practice, you have to criticise all, not only one company.
You have started it, not me
.Yes, I agree, worst of it are the stupid guys like cmo, F.S.B; J.B. etc at sw-magazin.de. Ridiculuos people, ridiculuous discussions.
I am using films from Kodak, Ilford, Fuji, Agfa/Rollei-Film, Spur, Foma, Freestyle, Adox, Lucky.
I love to experiment with different emulsions and film characteristics. Every manufacturer has strong films in his programme.
And I am happy about every company on the market offering film products for us.
It doesn't interest me much which name is on the box. If the film is good I am happy.
Cheers,
Jan
HHPhoto
Well-known
Hi Mike,
sorry, but that is wrong. Adox has no own chemical production. And the papers are produced by www.inoviscoat.de for Adox (Adox is currently building up cutting and packing capabilities for paper, but they have not finished it yet)
Rodinal and Neutol are produced by the former Agfa chemical plant in Vaihingen, Germany. This plant now belongs to 'Connect Chemie'.
They sell the biggest part of their Rodinal and Netol production to Maco Photo Products (R09 One Shot), and the smaller one to Fotoimpex/Adox (Adonal).
Cheers,
Jan
sorry, but that is wrong. Adox has no own chemical production. And the papers are produced by www.inoviscoat.de for Adox (Adox is currently building up cutting and packing capabilities for paper, but they have not finished it yet)
Rodinal and Neutol are produced by the former Agfa chemical plant in Vaihingen, Germany. This plant now belongs to 'Connect Chemie'.
They sell the biggest part of their Rodinal and Netol production to Maco Photo Products (R09 One Shot), and the smaller one to Fotoimpex/Adox (Adonal).
Cheers,
Jan
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
About Agfa's photographic products, here in Spain I buy APX100 and Rodinal constantly.
Cheers,
Juan
Cheers,
Juan
HHPhoto
Well-known
With slide film that has already happened: Agfa-Gevaert Aviphot Chrome 200 is the original Agfa RSX II 200 emulsion coated on PET base. You can buy this film as Rollei CR 200.
The Aviphot Color negative films are a bit different compared to the last Agfa Germany CN films. But not in the sense like rxmd said. They have not so punchy colors, more subdued.
The Aviphot Color 400 is available as Rollei CN 200 (bit finer grain and better shadow detail when exposed at 200).
Cheers,
Jan
HHPhoto
Well-known
Phillip,
your comments look like you have never used the Agfa films by yourself.
I have done it and have compared them to my favourite Kodak, Ilford, Fuji, Foma, Adox, Lucky films.
The complete aerial film line is dedicated for photographers. The only difference is that these films have higher resolution and extended red sensivity.
Extended red sensivity is excellent for landscape photography with yellow, orange and red filters, because then you can cut excellent through haze and fog and get excellent clear images.
It is also often helpful in portrait photography, because with these films skin tones become a bit lighter and skin defects are surpressed and less visible.
I have done some excellent portrait work with Agfa Aviphot Pan 80 and 200 (Rollei Retro 80S and Superpan 200).
I am not using them all the time for portraits, lots of my portrait work is still taken on Ilford Delta, but I have often situations, when I got the better look with films with extended red sensivity.
We have more options now, I think that is good.
Sorry, that is wrong. The Agfa color aerial films have no extended red sensivity like the BW emulsions. They look like other CN films.The difference is that their color pallette is not as punchy, the colors are more subdued. The look is similar to CN films of the seventees. But only similar, not identical.
It is a matter of taste.
I prefer the Fuji and Kodak CN films, that is more my taste.
Cheers,
Jan
your comments look like you have never used the Agfa films by yourself.
I have done it and have compared them to my favourite Kodak, Ilford, Fuji, Foma, Adox, Lucky films.
The complete aerial film line is dedicated for photographers. The only difference is that these films have higher resolution and extended red sensivity.
Extended red sensivity is excellent for landscape photography with yellow, orange and red filters, because then you can cut excellent through haze and fog and get excellent clear images.
It is also often helpful in portrait photography, because with these films skin tones become a bit lighter and skin defects are surpressed and less visible.
I have done some excellent portrait work with Agfa Aviphot Pan 80 and 200 (Rollei Retro 80S and Superpan 200).
I am not using them all the time for portraits, lots of my portrait work is still taken on Ilford Delta, but I have often situations, when I got the better look with films with extended red sensivity.
We have more options now, I think that is good.
Sorry, that is wrong. The Agfa color aerial films have no extended red sensivity like the BW emulsions. They look like other CN films.The difference is that their color pallette is not as punchy, the colors are more subdued. The look is similar to CN films of the seventees. But only similar, not identical.
It is a matter of taste.
I prefer the Fuji and Kodak CN films, that is more my taste
.Cheers,
Jan
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
All you really need is Tri-X! Long live Tri-X. The smell when opening that metal tin with 100' of Tri-X. Ambrosia. Potential.
I'm fascinated by folks who constantly experiment with different films and developers because it is a part of photography that never interested me. Film and processing and printing in a darkroom were all a just necessary means to an end. Actually shooting images is the part of photography that interests me. So I standardized on everything decades ago and only changed if one of my favorites disappeared.
I know all the experimenting is an important aspect of the hobby to many. Never could get into it myself. Guess it comes from shooting for a living.
I'm fascinated by folks who constantly experiment with different films and developers because it is a part of photography that never interested me. Film and processing and printing in a darkroom were all a just necessary means to an end. Actually shooting images is the part of photography that interests me. So I standardized on everything decades ago and only changed if one of my favorites disappeared.
I know all the experimenting is an important aspect of the hobby to many. Never could get into it myself. Guess it comes from shooting for a living.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
I don't think I would be able to name six favourite films of mine (maybe two or three), let alone six favourite brands.
The Agfa films I've shot extensively were APX 100 (which was nice until my supply of bulk rolls ran out, I gave the last two or three bulk rolls away) and the Agfa Optima series of colour films, which I miss.
I don't think much about "comparing" and "testing" films all day. Either you want to do it systematically and have to spend lots of time and energy on it (which is time not spent enjoying photography as I like to do it). Or you just take it as a exercise in ordering one or two rolls of all sorts of films and shoot a few rolls of each, and then you don't get to know your material very well. I've been there myself, though, having done my share of playing around; I tried a couple of rolls from any of the companies you mentioned (admittedly only one Lucky, crossprocessed into B&W slides), and in the long run I found it rather pointless.
Did I mention red sensitivity in the colour films? I don't think so. I've only used aerial colour film once, though, so my opinion isn't exactly based on a long history of professional work with it. Anyway, the spectral response was clearly different, but the main problem there was the absence of a mask, so there was lots of light piping, and had the impression that it was less forgiving to overexposure. Of course you can compensate for the spectral response thing and the mask in postprocessing, but not for the light piping and halos.
Then there are the weirder films like Rollei "Redbird" and "Nightbird". I'm sure you know what material is being repackaged there. I don't, I only found that the pictures look a bit weird; if I got that kind of stuff back from my lab I'd suspect a processing error.
Last edited:
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
On a side note, this is exactly what bothers me about German photo forums, people personally calling each other names in public (ridiculous people, stupid guys etc.), barely disguised behind abbreviated or non-abbreviated online usernames, googling their real names etc., just because those people happen to hang around in the wrong wiener dog club.
I'm really happy that RFF is largely free of that. Let's not start it here.
batterytypehah!
Lord of the Dings
You're making a good point for ending this thread right here, before the two of you start calling each other names.
R
Roberto
Guest
Sorry, but as far as I know PCB film stands for Printed Circuit Board film (that should be the reason for 1 million sqaure meters per day) and it does not relate in any way with their photographic materials..
Did I miss something?
R.
Did I miss something?
R.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
HHPhoto
Well-known
For me using different films with different charcteristics and looks means more creative choices to express my vision.
It's like painting: Most painters are using different colors, and not only one.
For me using only one film is like painting with only one color. That is the reason why I enjoy using different films (and developers).
Cheers,
Jan
HHPhoto
Well-known
Different photographers, different kind of working techniques.
Yes, I do tests systematically. Yes, it costs a bit time at the beginning (like learning the sensor and its characteristics with a new DSLR).
But after that I know what I have and can use it in the way it works best, and can even go to the limits of the material.
I know the strenghts and weaknesses. I can fully exploit the creative potential of the material.
After this initial test I can use the film for years. For me the time effort is worth it. Compared to the long using period the time used for the test doesn't matter.
Cheers,
Jan
HHPhoto
Well-known
Agreed. Nevertheless it is interesting that you are very active especially in that german forum, where this is happening permanently
.By the way, I am not hiding my name, I am Jan Heuer.
Cheers,
Jan
HHPhoto
Well-known
Yes, it is clearly said in the press release that the number of 1 million m² film production per day is related to the total film production of Agfa. All their different film types together including their great variety of different movie, graphic and photo films.
Cheers,
Jan
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Agreed. Nevertheless it is interesting that you are very active especially in that german forum, where this is happening permanently
I guess you're talking about the Phototec forum? I used to write there quite a bit (and I think many of the technical discussions are still good). But I definitely agree on the personal atmosphere there. People do have a tendency to go over the top - sometimes when they do I try to tell them, but I have my doubt that it helps much.
I have the impression that it's more or less the same everywhere in most of the German forums, maybe it's only different people making up the vocal majority. Maybe I'm wrong (but I don't really think so).
Anyway, I think I have something like four times more posts here at RFF than there and in a shorter time, which says something about my sympathies