What is Acros then?

[sg_adams]

Someone commented in a post below that Fuji Acros is not a tabular or T-grain

film. What is it then? Anyone want to elaborate?

I have got good and bad results with it. Most recently better results

actually in HC-110 just to see what it would do inthat developer,and it did

really well, better than in D-76 1:1 I thought, which kind of surprized me

though I am new to the HC.

[jamespjones]

http://www.fujifilmusa.com/JSP/fuji/epartners/bin/NeopanAcros100.pdf

 

For the datasheet and explanation

 

James

[fourthst]

Well, I was curious too and checked Fuji's site. Oddly enough it wasn't much help explaining what it was. I would have to guess it is a similar, yet proprietary engineered grain shape. Perhaps someone could enlighten SG and me.

[the world in black white]

Fuji calls it "sigma grain". Here is a link for starting your research:

http://www.apogeephoto.com/sept2001/cgroenhout092001.shtml

[the world in black white]

Actually, the link that I provided above is no more informative about the grain, per se, than the data sheet to which James refers. I guess Fuji chooses to keep it a mystery?

[bobmichaels]

Does it really matter what technology Fuji uses? Or, what name they give it?

 

I find this film works very well. I've used HC-110 and Rodinal for developer. If it works for you, then use it. It if doesn't work to your satisfaction, don't use it. Focus on print quality and not technical buzz words.

 

The label given to it doesn't matter.

[the world in black white]

Bob Michaels: It matters to the extent of being able to effectively communicate. Just as you refer to HC-110 and Rodinal, those too are just labels ("buzz words") but they serve a purpose, i.e. communication.

[sg_adams]

What's with the attitude up there?

No one asked about labeling.

[fourthst]

Bob, I suppose ultimately it doesn't matter. However, if I know going in that it is an "engineered" grain I know that it reacts more dramatically to development time and temp changes than the films I currently use. Since I have been considering trying Acros I thought this info would be helpful.

[Vlad Soare]

Bob, it may not matter from a practical point of view, but let's just say it's for the sake of curiosity. It's a valid question, it's not like he asked anything outrageous. ;-)<br>

Come to think of it, a tabular-grain film needs a longer fixing time and exhausts the fixer faster, so it may actually not be completely useless to know if your film is tabular or not. ;-)<br>

<br>

While I'm not very sure about it, I believe the Across is not a tabular grain film. It uses what Fuji calls Sigma technology, which, I believe, reduces the grain size without resorting to flat grains. I don't know how they did it, perhaps they used some sort of special sensitizer dyes... I don't think they used flat grains, like Kodak did with T-Max. But I'm just speculating.

[bljkasfdljkasfdljskfa]

Every time this comes up, someone has a need to clarify that "tabular" is specific to Kodak - so there. Other companies have different marketdroid speak about their films with designed grain. Someone coined a term "design grain" to describe grain that is not shaped naturally (as silver grain shaped by nature in "traditional" films - a misnomer IMO as well), but specially shaped to absorb more light by processes invented by humans. Why not use the "design grain" term to refer to these films instead of using obscure marketdroid speak such as "T-grain", etc?