eskil_hess

I forgot to say that I have actually tried a lab that used DDX, but I liked XTOL more. But TMAX is fluid, so why use DDX instead of TMAX?

I can say that I am after the same look I receive by XTOL. I scan my images, so I guess that's relevant as well. Kodak, please announce a fluid XTOL

I am a real fan of tri-x pushed to 1600 developed in XTOL, but I hate the thought of mixing powder. Have anyone tried it in TMAX? If I look at the following two images which compares XTOL and TMAX for tri-x, it looks to me like TMAX actually has finer grain? http://fotoimport.no/images/filmtest/helebildet/TriX400-Xtol-10m.jpg http://fotoimport.no/images/filmtest/helebildet/TriX400-Tmax-6,5m.jpg

<p>Okay everyone, I think I am getting pretty close now. I changed my post processing a bit, and like this a lot better now. I think the only thing I am missing now is to go up to 1600, and more importantly changing up to Rodinal. Thoughts?<br /><br /><img src="http://i.imgur.com/SAmZP8e.jpg" alt="" /></p> <p>(view this high res here: http://i.imgur.com/SAmZP8e.jpg)</p>

Thank you for your answer. So right now I have Rodinal and DDX to choose between. Is Rodinal okay to get the look I am after even though the film will be pushed to 800-1600? Is 1:50 okay for example?

<p>So the fact that I am using DDX now, and not Rodinal, can be the reason to why I am not getting the look I want?</p>

<p>By the way, when you suggest Rodinal, do you mean stand developing or just normal development? I read that some people say Rodinal is not good for when you push film, but that's probably because they want a really flat negative? </p>

<p>John: Both photos are scanned digitaly. </p>

<p>Actually I dont know if its mainly about the grain. I like the deep blacks, the "dirty" look and the huge contrast.</p>

<p>Actually Chris, both photographs attached here are taken in 2015 with new tri-x :) </p>

<p>Hey everyone.</p> <p>I have currently made a drastic turn in my photography, and now almost only shoot film, especially tri-x.. The reason for this is that I want the pushed tri-x look, with the deep blacks, the gritty look and the insane contrast. I am pretty close to replicating this look, but I feel that I am missing something?<br /><br />First of all, this is the look I am trying to replicate:<img src="http://i.imgur.com/uzjasWJ.jpg" alt="" width="960" height="636" /></p> <p>I know this shot is shot at 1600, and for now I have only done 800:<br /><img src="http://i.imgur.com/EU69TPr.jpg" alt="" width="960" height="645" /><br> So my question is, what am I missing?</p> <p>I have three teories:</p> <p>1. I need to push the tri-x even one step further(1600 instead of 800)<br /> 2. I need to change developer? I currently use DDX<br /> 3. There is some magic in post processing I havent quite catched yet.</p>

<p>By the way, I meant the 77m adapter..<br /> Also, if I understand correct, the Lee polariser isn't worth purchasing now, as Lee has released a new one called Landscape Polarizer.</p> <p>I think I get this instead: <img src="http://i.imgur.com/eFL74FA.png" alt="" width="378" height="628" /></p>

<p>I am currently on my way to the store, but would like to confirm with the peeps here about the Lee Filters system and the Canon 17-40 first. Is there any vignetting at all using the Lee Filters foundation holder with a 105mm polariser mounted? This is what I'm thinking of purchasing:<br> (the first product is LEE nd graduated soft kit)</p> <p><img src="http://1.static.img-dpreview.com/files/p/TS560x560~forums/54556065/6beb64f386d44467a4021088152e721a" alt="" /></p> <p > </p>

<p>It was photographed during the day, but during the wintertime, so was a dull light.</p> <p>But that must have been really bad luck? Several people never saw this happen once. I guess if I actually purchase the Lee Filter holder with the Lee Filter wide angle adapter, this will prevent this, or at least be better. The Hitech holder even appeared with dark vignetting on 17-20 mm on the 17-40 lens.</p>

http://i.imgur.com/MF1fZec.jpg Here's an example of the spots. This is the first time I used the filter.