Adox CMS 20 .. results underwhelming

<p>So I shot a roll in a Minox B, ASA 20 (DIN 14) developed in Adotech II for 10 minutes, etc. etc. following the instructions. The results are not at all what I was expecting (after seeing Max Aleshin's results.) Granted the weather wasn't that nice, but this looks like what I got when shooting Retro 80s and developing in R09 or ID-11.</p>

<p>Am I missing something? Does this film need to be shot at ASA 12?</p>

<p>The results look fine to me with good tonality. Although contrast seems a little high (which I personally like), which could be a function of agitation.</p>

<p>If this is straight print ( or scan) from the film, it is excellent. As photography in analog and digital, doesn't ending with the negative / RAW /.jpg file. The second part is the development, editing, processing and fine tuning all the available data on the negative, and as I see you have plenty, even in this pure reduced file on the PN. The quality of a final print, even it is digital, the edited, processed image, depend on you technical and artistic pre-visualization. With a good darkroom technic, even it is digital, you can create a stunning b&w image from a not so perfect negative.</p>

<p>Thank you for your comments! Yes, this is a straight scan, with no touching-up (just resized.) I don't dislike what I got, but I am disappointed.</p>

<p>I was looking at this thread on Flickr: <a href="https://www.flickr.com/groups/1261527@N20/discuss/72157655917726651/">https://www.flickr.com/groups/1261527@N20/discuss/72157655917726651/</a></p>

<p>And these results from the same film/developer combination: <a href="

<p>In comparison to the this, the results I got are distinctly lacking. What did I do wrong?</p>

<p>Looks like yours are higher contrast and he has added a sepia tone to his scanned film. Detail appears similar, that Minox lens is certainly amazing. I've been shooting old Ilford Pan F (exp. 2010) at ISO 25 in 1:60 HC110 as a one shot because that is what I got on hand. If I manage not to scratch the dickens out of it, then it's not too bad, considering. Certainly nowhere near the performance this guy gets.</p>

<p>This is what I think. I'm not going to shoot a 8X11mm negative and then try to make it look like 35mm, for that I got 35mm.</p>

<p><strong>john robison</strong> - I agree. At the same time, I'm trying to get as much resolution as possible.</p>

<p>NM- That is a fun challenge. I'm an old timer who remembers Minox sales reps back in the early 70's who would set up a camera on copy stand and using line copy film photograph a standard 8.5 X 11 inch printed page. They would then enlarge the negatives and you could read every line on the page. Of course this was like microfiche film, negatives of soot and chalk, so not really useful for continuous tone grey scale reproduction. Hope you are able to sort out your image chain to get the results you want.</p>

<p>Adox CMS 20 has ultra high resolution of 800 line per mm, much better than Techpan 200 lpm, hence it can get the most<br>

resolution out of Minox.</p>

<p>I think you might have focused Minox at hyperfocal red dot instead of infinity. For objiect at infinity<br /> it is better to focus at infinity.<br /> The second is posssible camera shake. Try to test your Minox by put it on a tripod and shoot again to see any difference.</p>

<p><strong>john robison</strong> - Thank you! I can't say it hasn't been fun.<br>

<strong> </strong><br>

<strong>Martin Tai</strong> - I always check if focus is on infinity.</p>

<p>I have developed 3 rolls now. ASA 12 can be difficult to shoot unless it's bright & sunny out. In the shadows, shutter speeds can drop to 1/10 or 1/5. </p>

<p>Looking back now, the results have been pretty good, all things considered (and compared to the other emulsions I've used.) I have found in particular, that close-up shots show <em>excellent</em> results.</p><div></div>

<p>Adox CMS II<br>

ASA 12<br>

Ado tech II</p><div></div>

<p>Ilford Pan F+ 50<br>

ID-11</p><div></div>

<p>Adox is clearly better than PanF+</p>