Paulbe
Well-known
Fuji Provia 400--and Sensia--when compared to Velvia--the Provia and Sensia films are muddy.
The Provia 400X does have hope, though...
Paul in slideville
The Provia 400X does have hope, though...
Paul in slideville
jan normandale
Film is the other way
Roland, re scanning check D. Stella's first post in this thread ...
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=62615
BTW you're the second person to say NPZ 800. Do you have a link or image?
jan normandale
Film is the other way
I wish I knew.. it's like Tri X at 400. Something happens but you can't tell if it's just repackaging and marketing or a fundamental product change
Some images here would be nice for the rest of this thread's participants
ferider
Veteran
Thanks, Jan !
I just started using NPZ, for portrait's mostly. Nothing presentable yet, but the film is easier on slight under-exposure than, say, Superia 800. "kevin m" showed some available light examples which convinved me, you might want to ping him.
Roland.
julianphotoart
No likey digital-phooey
Kodak Ultra 100. Used multiple times and used multiple film processing facilities and it always comes out disgustingly contrasty.
Next in line is any kind of B&W chromogenic film. It gives the same sort of grainless, creamy, DEAD look that digital B&W gives.
Next in line is any kind of B&W chromogenic film. It gives the same sort of grainless, creamy, DEAD look that digital B&W gives.
jan normandale
Film is the other way
I agree about the similarity between digi BW and chromogenic BW; both XP2 and Kodak BW. I don't know if there are other C41 BW's
AshenLight
Established
I seem to remember being very unhappy with some Konica color film years ago. I'm not totally in love with Superia either although I recently got 16 rolls of 2 year past date Fuji Press 400 for $1 a roll that worked out well for me. If I'm not mistaken, Fuji discontinued Press... too bad.
mh2000
Well-known
Old Kodak Recording film (remember when people tried to convince you that it was cool?).
The Chinese film that came with my first Diana camera.
I didn't like Efke 400 b&w in 35mm much, but I think you could get it to work for you.
Who cares about color????
favorites: APX25, Delta 100 & 400,TP, TX, TMX, TMY, BW400CN.
The Chinese film that came with my first Diana camera.
I didn't like Efke 400 b&w in 35mm much, but I think you could get it to work for you.
Who cares about color????
favorites: APX25, Delta 100 & 400,TP, TX, TMX, TMY, BW400CN.
Nokton48
Veteran
A roll of 70mm B&W, some kind of Aero Plus-X I bought on Ebay. When I poured out the developer, most of the blackened emulsion poured out with it. Killed my first batch of ADOX Borax MQ. The fixer took the rest of the emulsion off.
Wonder what was on that 15' roll?
Wonder what was on that 15' roll?
mh2000
Well-known
Once you scan and enlarge it the grain aliasing looks kind of like Tri-X!
really... I am being serious, laid next to my traditional Tri-X prints my well done HP b&w inkjet prints will not jump out at you... certainly not at first glance anyway...
>>Next in line is any kind of B&W chromogenic film. It gives the same sort of grainless, creamy, DEAD look that digital B&W gives.
really... I am being serious, laid next to my traditional Tri-X prints my well done HP b&w inkjet prints will not jump out at you... certainly not at first glance anyway...
>>Next in line is any kind of B&W chromogenic film. It gives the same sort of grainless, creamy, DEAD look that digital B&W gives.
jan normandale
Film is the other way
Fotch
Man with a RF Camera
3M Color (negatives) film from the early 70's. I worked for 3M and the employee prices were unbelievable. So was the film, ugly greenish cast and horrible grain. This is the stuff made by Ferrania.
Maybe its better now but I will not ever try it again.
Maybe its better now but I will not ever try it again.
amateriat
We're all light!
Oooh...you had to remind me of MAX. (Any MAX, for that matter.) That comes in between High Speed Ektachrome and Kodacolor 400 on my list. (I was hoping to keep it at three.)
- Barrett
gb hill
Veteran
You guys beat me to it, but that Kodak MAX esp. the 800 is /was crap.Way to much grain! Fuji X-tra like you get at Wal-Mart is also a bunch of crap. I haven't had much luck with XP-2. I like the BW400CN from Kodak much better. For conventional B&W film I can't say because there are so many different developer/film combinations where a film shines in one type of developer but only so so in another. So I think you have to experiment to get the combination that works best for you. There may be some B&W films that it doesn't matter what dev. you use but I haven't shot any of it yet.
bean_counter
Well-known
yeah, Kodak max 800 is nasty. the last photo of my in-laws together before she passed away was shot on it, on a crap P&S; under exposed, huge grain. my sister-in-law begged me to scan it and "make it better than the drug-store print". hopeless.
Gold isn't much better; my avatar was shot with it and an Elmar 50/3.5 on purpose for that "old vacation snapshot" look.
Gold isn't much better; my avatar was shot with it and an Elmar 50/3.5 on purpose for that "old vacation snapshot" look.
chikne
Well-known
Ilford Pan F 50.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
I shoot a lot of expired too and I'm with you on most of the one's you've listed but I'm surprised about the grain comment for NPS which I don't find totally different from NPH. Here's a shot with NPH at low (30%) res for the web, the full resolution is stunning.
Jan, that's lovely. My only 5 rolls of NPS came as a "bonus" from a 'bay film purchase. No telling how "expired" they were
This is one example, this level of grain is not what I'd expect from a 160 ASA film. And that annoying purplish hue on the ground...
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
My condolences on your passing. One more film user gone. But at least you (or your next of kin) could make millions selling whatever you've invented that's allowing you to send your findings in from the afterlife!
Boy, you're the funny one in class, aren't ya?
timmyd18
Established
there was a question about good 800 films, i've had an ok time with the Fuji Walgreens 800.
I actually have done ok with Kodak Max 800 under certain conditions.
I actually have done ok with Kodak Max 800 under certain conditions.
timmyd18
Established
i sorta think the decision to use an 800 film is an interesting one... it is inherently grainy but not as versatile or pleasantly grainy as a 1600. i think it's basically a compromise film and therefore doesn't really please everyone, but will perform so-so in a wide range of conditions