pascal_miele

Stefan, a B&W paper with extended chromatic sensibility is not easy to find. The only one in the commercial market semms to be the panalure as noted Lex. extended, but not complete.

May be in the scientific market (I doubt !)

My (expensive and not easy) solution: use a panchromatic film in large format, develop with a reversal process and print a contact.

You can use a classic process (negative dev) but the final print would be "slighly" different !

The advantage of this solution is the possibility of multiple print from the "lazerizied" film (may be it's not an advantage if you want unique prints!)

Bon courage !

Walter if you want to know everything about everybody, yes you need to go everywhere !

With the web it's a cool job, but is this realy necessary ????

Maybe you can find (I doubt !) a perfect Chinese film and a perfect Hugarian dev, but if you can't use it........

"Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien"

The question is : what is a good pic ????

It's a very subjective thing.

If you make wedding pictures every week: 2 a month can be a good result for you, not for your clients !

For this kind of commercial work, 90% of "good" pic is a minimum ! (good = good to sell)

If you make picts for you, not for a client, 2 a month is good. After 3 years you will look these 72 picts and may be keep 10 ! ;-)

For very thin negatives

you need a grade 5 paper (a lot), patience and perseverance !

Bon courage !

A 80 filter (80A, B, C.....) is too light for a strog correction in B&W

It's like the difference between tungsten and daylight in B&W you can see it, but it's not a strog effect.

For a real ortho effect you need a deep blue filter.

For a baby face it's good, but the blue filter has a strong effect on the red and many adults dont'like the ehancement of skin imperfections !

I use Neopan 400 and D-23.

I don't know if it is the best combo.

1) film: I found a big pack of Neopan 400 for a good price.

2) dev: I want a fine grain dev with good tone. D23 is very easy to prepare and very inexpensive too.

If you choose a "classic" film and a "classic" dev, it's not easy to obtain bad results.

The Good combo is the one you know. choose a film and a dev, make some tests (1 or 2 films) to have an idea of the possible results and after use it. The more you use it the best are the results !

After some month you can say "it's not a good combination for me" but you know why, and you know exactly where to go for a new combination.

You can make a contrast comparison of chromognic films (XP2 and T400CN) because C-41 process is a standarized dev.

with classic B&W you can't compare contrast.

Tmax 400 is Ok with Xtol 6 1/2 mn, contrast is 0.58 (kodak datasheet)

but the same Tmax 400 with the same Xtol for 5mn is soft

and the same Tmax 400 with the same Xtol for 10mn is hard

Classic B&W film had no "intrinsic contrast"

Portra 400 BW is a BW portrait film (like other PORTRA films in color)

T400CN is a multi-purpose chromogenic B&W film.

The contrast of the T400CN is "classic" but the Portra400 BW is soft.

you have datasheet on kodak.com

I never used Ilfochrome classic with pinhole, but with view camera: it's different but it's the same think !

You expose directly on the paper, a 85B filter give you more natural colors in daylight. But for acurate colors you need tests and CC filters.

If you don't have darkroom, the best way is to use a Jobo processor. Load the drum with charging bag, when the drum is loaded, the Jobo work in daylight. You can find used jobo processors on Ebay.

Ifochrome doc : www.ilford.com

like many color negative films Fuji 800 is good at nominal ISO and good too at ISOx1/2 and ISOx1/4.

At ISOx2 you have a picture but the quality is not very good.

The C41 system (film+dev) is a very flexible system.

with color matrix F5 use one more parameter (color) for the determination of exposure.

It's only one more parameter for the computer, no more, but this give a more acurate exposure.

Did you like BIG grain ?

Did you like BIG contrast ?

if yes HP5/D19 is for you !

You can use HP5 @ 100 with pull dev.

But for strong contrast it's not a good idea, pull dev give soft contrast.

Use your HP5 @ 400 with a classic dev, like D76 (fine grain, correct details) or Rodinal (very sharp but grainy).

For good black you just need a good printing !

For a good light flash on the camera is not the good way.

Tadge, if you need long exposure use Fuji NPL not NPS. (http://www.fujifilm.com/JSP/fuji/epartners/bin/AF3-810E.pdf)

But

with your 4x5 and a 160ISO film, exposures can be short in daylight, if you don't use f:512 (sun, f:32 1/30s)

you can find Kodak and Agfa farge format films.

if you need long exposures use L films

L films are tungsten light and Long exposure

S films are daylight (of flash) and Short exposure

you can use L films in daylight with a 85B filter.

I agree with you, color printing can be very exciting !

John,

For the Atgets dev I don't know if he use wine (I think he used vin ordinaire for him ! )

But for measuring exposure times he use the "cigarette timer": night with many lights: you smoke one cigarette during exposure, low light two cigerettes, etc...

With wine and cigarettes he lives from 1857 to 1927, and metol is hazardous !

When you compare the curves of Neopan 400 and Tri X (see fuji and kodak websites).

Kodak Tri-X is like many 400 ISO films, "low" contrast in shadows and "high" contast in lights. The low and high are relative of course ! (with HC110/TX320, LF or 120, the effect is strong)

Fuji Neopan 400 is "strange", because the hight contrast is in shadows and low contrast in lights.

It's a good choice, because usualy light in shadow is soft and hard in lights. If the film compensate this natural effect it's good for the print.

The price of this contrast is an acurate exposure, if you use 200 it's more easy (but in my opinion 400 is a good index for the film).

I think (need to be verified !) the soft shadows effect of TX is an "historic effect".

In the begining of fast BW photography (50's 60's), technology was the reason of this shadow softness, a way to "keep some power" for push dev without too excessive contrast.

Now this shadow softness in an "aesthetic habit" because photographer are very conservative, (and some american photographer are ultra conservative: where can you find user of kodak super-XX ??? ).

I am a new user of the neopan 400 (actualy with D23) and the more I use it, the more I like it !

with my FE and F3 I use a Sunpack Auto 120J.

It's a classic cobra flash, but with a BIG reflector (12cm bowl) the light is much softer than small reflectors flashes.

The other characteristic are very classic, orientable head, auto computer (3 positions) fast recycling, etc...

Here on the "côte Basque" (Biarritz, Hossegor, Lacanau...) we have the same, with bigger waves and no cloth !

sorry no pict ! ;-)

1) use a tripod, not only for stability but you can choose a good place, install and focus, etc... the camera, and after install the group and take your pictures quickly. A group is a very impatient animal !

2) if you use a tripod you can use a 100 ISO film with a better definition, important when you have a picture where small faces must be clearly visible.

3) use your lens at 85mm, not too close stop to separate group from background

4) be patient: 10 girls (teenagers and early twenties) ;-)

In "Chimie et physique photographique" P. Glafkidès

"Any substance with an oxydo-reduction potential <0.180v had a chance to develop a photographic image. Arribat (Sci et Ind Photog, 1944, 15, p204) tried with succes many products : sugar, leucobasis, hemoglobin, anaerobic bacillus, old burgondy wine with alkali, etc..."

In france we are disadvantaged, we must add alkali to our wine to develop, but in USA I'm sure you can develop with your pure american wine !

It's only a joke, in france too we can make bad wine !!! ;-)

Pascal

one flash direct, no softbox, only reflector for highlight.

one flash (with or without softbox) to light the shadows.

it's a good way to have contrast.... even in some case too much contrast !

softbox....for soft light !

try flash without softbox.

try black walls (or great black pannels aroud subject)

a good alternative to macro lens, for copy work, is an enlarger lens on bellow. It's not easy to use like a macro lens, but for copy it's not a problem.

Your 28-70 or the 1,4/50 can make the job, but not for a hight quality result.

In the sixities Novoflex (germany, famous for it's fast focus 400mm) made a 35mm macro. I use it one day, it was a strange lens, an helicoidal system, like any lens, on a central tube to "click" for increasing the size of the lens.

As Winfied say, division of a powder is not a good idea... in theory !

It's just a fixer, not a developer, you can divide your pack without big problems.

An other way: prepare your 5 gal and keep 4 gal in a bottle, fixer keep well.