johnny_motown1

I just recently got back from a trip to Canada. These are the things

I have learned:

<p>

Don't put film in your checked luggage. X-Ray for checked luggage is

much stronger than carry-on.

<p>

Don't put film in lead bags. If the X-Ray machine can't penetrate it

initially, they crank up the dosage until they can. I am also told

that anything slower than ISO 1600 is safe to be put through. Be

careful of multiple exposures to X-Rays, they are apparently

culmulative.

<p>

Ask for film to be hand checked. I believe in the US, they have to

comply. Outside the US, you are subject to local customs. The best

method I have found so far is to take 35mm film out of the plastic

canisters and put them all in a large ziplock baggie. They are safe

from dirt, dust and grime and security can see everything at once.

Being that they can fish around the bag without opening it, you can

get though faster. If you bring your film in plastic canisters,

expect them to go through each and every can.

<p>

Be prepared to get searched. Arrive with plenty of time for a

thorough search routine. Make sure everything can be powered on and

checked. Palm pilots, cameras, cell phones, portable CD players

included. If it is electronic and can't be powered on to prove it is

what it is, it won't go. Expect lenses to be scrutinized (remove end

caps so they can see through them), filters, film, etc.

<p>

As far as equipment restrictions, I brought a fair amount of gear in

my hiking backpack and didn't have a problem.

<p>

Hope this helps!

I store my chems in Falcon air-evac bottles. They are collapsible so

I can adjust them as I use the chems up. As for having chems sitting

around and getting old, it just means you're not out there shooting

enough. ;-)

Hi there! I have fooled around a little bit with C-41 B&W films.

This is what I have found:

<p>

Kodak T400CN - lab prints come back sepia toned. If your

photofinisher can adjust the filtering correctly, they might come out

without a color cast. Also, you might be able to ask them to use a

B&W paper in the machine. You can take the negatives and print them

in the traditional wet darkroom.

<p>

Ilford XP2 Super - Pretty much the same deal as T400CN. Sepia

machine prints, usable negatives for the wet darkroom.

<p>

Kodak Select B&W+ - An ok consumer grade film. Balanced to give no

color cast when machine printed. Negatives cannot be printed in the

wet darkroom.

<p>

Kodak PORTA B&W - Nice pro grade film. Like its consumer cousin, it

gives no color cast when machine printed but cannot be printed in the

wet darkroom. Aimed at pros that want to shoot B&W for clients

without the muss and fuss of a wet darkroom.

<p>

It all depends upon what you want. If you don't have a setup at home

to develop negatives (or don't want one), C-41 films might be a good

option to getting B&W prints. If you want to print negatives in the

darkroom, go with XP2 or T400CN. If you are happy with just having a

lab do your developing and printing, go with B&W+ or PORTA B&W.

I'm not a printing guru but it sounds like you didn't have them in

the fixer long enough or you didn't wash them long enough.

Michael and Chris,

<p>

According to Popular Photography's website, Chinon only made on model

camera, the CP9-AF in 1988. I gleaned it from here:

<p>

http://www.popphoto.com/Camera/ArticleDisplay.asp?ArticleID=51

<p>

(See Mason, I pop over to your work website every now and then. ;-) )

It is to my understanding that XP2 and T400CN can be printed in the

one hour lab or via conventional B&W. Both are C-41 process for

negatives. Kodak's newest offerings, Black and White+ (consumer

grade) and PORTA B&W (pro grade) are meant for one hour lab

processing and printing. The biggest problem with using one hour

printing with T400CN is there is a sepia color cast (not sure about

XP2). The lab has to make a lot of adjustments to balance that out.

That is why Kodak came out with PORTA B&W and Black and White+. They

are optimized to be one hour printed (no color cast). Unfortunately

they are not meant for B&W printing.

Ryuji,

<p>

I have found that sometimes with 36 exposure rolls, I will get a

little bit of drag when I get to the middle or end of the roll. I

think this is contributed to me forcing the film through the reels

from the end (vs. SS reels you wind along). Where are you making the

initial cut along the sprocket holes? Are there any jagged edges or

sprocket holes? I could see where that might bind your film in the

spool.

I use 4 small reusable drink bottles. They are a quart in size (or

litre). They have wide mouths, screw-on lids, and a snap cover over

the spout. I premeasure my chems (dev, stop, fix and HCA) so when it

comes time to add them, I just add the entire container. Having them

premeasured also allows me to play with temperatures more easily

(less to bring up or down in temp). I have a small washtub that I

can fill with the proper temperature water (for maintaining or

adjusting temps). I drop in my small bottles and allow temps to

adjust. Every now and then I will pick up a bottle, swirl the chem

inside and measure the temp. It might take a little bit for temps to

come in. In the meantime, I finish up my other prep work (dig out my

timer, prep the darkroom bag, etc). When temps come in, it's

developing time!

<p>

Don't be in such a hurry to get things done. Take your time and you

can better guarantee your resultes.

Thank you all for your answers. I will definitely try it out more

and see if I really like it! Right now, I'm concentrating on using

Tri-X and learning that particular film.

All,

<p>

When I first started lurking the list, there was a discussion about TMax films. Someone said that they were able to pick out prints made from TMax negatives and that 'so will you when you know what to look for'. What exactly should I look for?

<p>

Also, I have noticed that TMax negatives are a little less contrasty than normal old-grain negatives. I'm sure it would require a higher grade paper/filter for printing. Is this right? Am I doing something wrong?

<p>

Thanks in advance,

I imagine Canon would charge an arm and a leg. Try places like

EBay. There might be one there (or at least a whole camera).

Thanks for the answers. I thought everything was ok but I wanted to

check with you all to be sure. Yes, the shadow detail is gone and it

looks like the highlights are weak (almost blocked up). By the way,

I forgot to mention that all chems used were used one-shot. Oh well,

that'll learn me! ;-)

Last night, I developed a roll of T-Max 100, shot at EI 400 (I know, stupid me for not checking the ISO after I loaded the film). Anyhow the negatives appear to be a little thin. They are also contrasty but I expected that with pushing film. The edge print looks just slightly thinner than usual (assuming due to extended development). Other than the thin-ness of the image, everything looks cool. I have never pushed film before and was just curious if I did it right. My setup:

<p>

All chems were in a 68 degree F water bath.

<p>

Sprint developer: 11 minutes, agitated first 30 seconds, 5 inversions every 30 seconds.

<p>

Kodak stop bath: 1 minute, constant agitation.

<p>

Sprint fixer: 3 minutes, first minute constant agitation, 10 seconds agitation every minute after that.

<p>

Water rinse: 1 minute, fill and dump.

<p>

Sprint HCA: 3 minutes, first minute constant agitation, 10 seconds agitation every minute after that.

<p>

Water rinse: 5 minutes, fill and dump.

<p>

Photo-flo bath

<p>

Did I do something wrong or is this the nature of pushed negatives (thin)? I have developed Tri-X and T-Max 400 with this method and times (with the exception of developer times - 8 minutes instead of 11) and I am happy with the results.

<p>

Thanks in advance for your advice!

Thanks for your answers! I developed the roll last night and they

are pretty contrasty (as to be expected). I just have to make sure

they were developed properly. (see another question on this forum) I

think they might be a challenge to print!

Here is a question for you negative souping masters. I was reading somewhere that someone only uses ISO 100 film (I think it was Delta 100). They use no other film. When they need ISO 400, they just take the ISO 100 and EI 400 with it.

<p>

Would it be better to expose ISO 400 or EI 400 (with ISO 100)? I know the trade-offs for pushing would be less shadow detail, more grain and more contrast. Which would look better in regards to finer grain and tonality?

<p>

I'm sure I could try it for myself but if someone has already done the experiement, inquiring minds would like to know! Thanks!

Under advice of this list, I'm about to try it myself. They all come

as fluids and you mix them 1:9 with water.

<p>

I bought mine from Bergen County Camera in NJ. 201-664-4113 I've

heard that there might be issues with shipping some of the chemicals

so ask if you buy them mail order from somewhere.

<p>

Johnny

Hi everybody! I decided to try the Sprint line of chemicals. I already had Kodak Indicator Stop and Photo-flo and Sprint's HCA. I went and bought Sprint's film developer and fixer. When I got home I read the fixer bottle and it said to add their Alum Hardener to the fixer. (It said I need it for negs but not for prints.) Do I really need a hardening agent in my fixer for my negs? I'm developing mostly Tri-X and some T-MAX.

<p>

Thanks in advance,

Boris, I've read that the new PORTA B&W is more like the consumer

B&W+, which is made to be printed RA-4.

<p>

Johnny

You have a couple of options. Ilford XP2, Kodak T400CN, Kodak Porta

B&W and Kodak Black and White + are all C-41 (one-hour process) black

and white films. There are some places that will process true B&W

for you but expect to pay about $20/roll for development (ouch). The

C-41 stuff listed above should cost the same as regular one-hour

color.

Michael,

<p>

It depends upon your theshold of 'inexpensive'. Latent Image is in

Manhattan (135 W. 26th, between 6th and 7th Ave). Darkrooms run

$10/hr (again, depends upon your threshold of 'inexpensive'). They

have B&W and color darkrooms/equipment. Dryers, trimmers and I think

I saw mounting presses. Check with them but I don't think the

drying/trimming/mounting counts as part of your rental time. I

believe the rental time is for use of the darkroom itself (which is

cool if they don't care if it takes you an hour longer to final

wash/dry). They have around 15 darkrooms. Just bring your paper and

negs. They supply fluids. Enlargers there are Saunders/LPL 4500

II's (color head). They also have glass (for contact prints) and 4

blade easels. I was there last weekend doing my first set of prints.

I would say start with a book, an online course or a course from your

local community college. Then haunt this list. The people here are

really great in helping you (I've learned quite a bit here)!

<p>

Johnny

Wow! We didn't have this when I was in cubs! Rather than learning

the processing end yourself and then teaching it to the cubs, try

contacting a local community college. See if they have a photography

class. Ask the instructor if he and his class would be willing to

handle the processing end for you (gives the students good practice

and it is good community volunteer work). You can go over with your

cubs what it takes to do processing without having to do it. If they

are really interested, you might be able to arrange a field trip to

the local community college and have the instructor give a

demonstration.

<p>

This project sounds like a one time thing (or maybe once a year).

Holding the attention of cubs for a long time is a challenge as well

as the time constraints (once a week for two hours or so). Whet

their appetites and if they want more, they will surely let you know!

Good God, my formatting is horrible! Let's try it again:

<p>

> The only reason to get sepia-toned (or any other color) RA-4 prints

from a chromogenic film is that the printer operator can't get a good

neutral balance.

<p>

Agreed. Most operators don't know how to do it or they don't want to.

They just want to load up the machine and let it crank. I wonder if

this new film will be like Black and White+. I believe that comes pre-

balanced for RA-4.

<p>

> I'm curious about that. I'm just speculating, but I think the r

eason is that that the base is so yellow it'd make getting a normal-

contrast print on VC paper very difficult. I can't think of any other

good reason Kodak would make such a statement...other than marketing.

<p>

I've noticed that my T400CN prints are pretty contrasty. I wonder if

they reduced the contrast for the PORTA film. It might be corrected

for RA-4 but flat for regular enlarger printing.

<p>

> The new Portra film will only interest me if its ISO speed is 100-

160 or 800. (And don't tell me about T400CN being 800 speed; I fell

for that one ONCE.)

<p>

I believe it is rated at 400. Kodak claims that it will do 25-1600.

John writes:

> The only reason to get sepia-toned (or any other color)

> RA-4 prints from a chromogenic film is that the printer

> operator can't get a good neutral balance.

>

Agreed. Most operators don't know how to do it or they don't want

to. They just want to load up the machine and let it crank. I

wonder if this new film will be like Black and White+. I believe

that comes pre-balanced for RA-4.

<p>

> I'm curious about that. I'm just speculating, but I think

> the r eason is that that the base is so yellow it'd make getting a

> normal-contrast print on VC paper very difficult. I can't think of

> any other good reason Kodak would make such a statement...other

> than marketing.

>

I've noticed that my T400CN prints are pretty contrasty. I wonder if

they reduced the contrast for the PORTA film. It might be corrected

for RA-4 but flat for regular enlarger printing.

<p>

John writes:

> The new Portra film will only interest me if its ISO

> speed is 100-160 or 800. (And don't tell me about

>T400CN being 800 speed; I fell for that one ONCE.)

>

I believe it is rated at 400. Kodak claims that it will do 25-1600.

<p>

Johnny