gigabit film

[lacey_smith4]

well, I finally tried the gigabit film (WWW.JANDCPHOTO, and you will

have to develop it yourself). On the extremes of Leicadom, we have

the fast and somewhat grainy tri-xers at the slowest, and the slow

and deliberate, optics at their best, end.

 

Gigabit at ASA 40, is that slow end. I find the only role I developed

much easier than tech-pan, though it shares some of the same

characteristics -- including that extended red sensitivity. It also

tends to curl (which they warn about). The contrast range seems good,

and this would appear to be easy to print (I have not made it to

darkrrom yet).

 

This scan is autocorrected by the scanning software (Polaroid 4000),

nothing more (and thus I am not posting it as a finished photo). It

corrected a touch darker/contrastier than the negative appears. (that

is why I am inserting it rather than posting it). In the next

message, I will post the 18X enlargement -- down to the scan-pixel

size, I cannot see "grain" - and I am seeing the fabric detail of the

felt on the tie. I can also see the depth of field differences

between the first and third seated women (which takes looking at the

tie detail).

 

35mm pre asph summicron, about f4.8, 1/250th.

 

ASA 40 is slow, however.<div></div>

[MTC Photography]

Gigabit film is only a marketing name for an old film: Agfa Copex Rapid Pan. <p>

I have used Agfa Copex film developed in two types of developer: 1+200 Rodinal and SPUR<p>When Copex negative enlarged to 25x, one start to see grains<p>

The Copex is infact slightly grainier than Kodak Technical Pan film,

but has higher acutance.<p>

[MTC Photography]

Erwin Puts had done extensive resolution test on many B&W film,

including gigabitfilm.<p>

 

http://www.imx.nl/photosite/technical/highres.html<p>

 

In his opinion, for 35mm negative, the threshold of usable resolution

is around 50-80 lpmm. Beyond that it is hard to achieve <p>

 

"To move beyond this threshold to values of 80 or 90 lp/mm, can be done, but the additional care, accuracy and control over all parameters is extremely demanding and you may question if this additional amount of control and energy is worth the effort"<p>

 

I agree.There isn't that much advantage in using Copex in 35mm camera, because the limit is the lens not the film<p>

 

For subminiature, 8x11mm, 16mm, it is different story; the film is

the limiting factor, that is where Copex may pay handsome dividend

when you get lucky (Copex is very prone to scratch, I load Copex directly into my Edixa 16M camera, without cassette, after finish a roll, do not rewind, get the film out in darkroom to avoid scratch)