eskil_hess
-
Posts
118 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by eskil_hess
-
-
I can say that I am after the same look I receive by XTOL. I scan my images, so I guess that's relevant as well. Kodak,
please announce a fluid XTOL
-
I am a real fan of tri-x pushed to 1600 developed in XTOL, but I hate the thought of mixing powder. Have anyone tried it in TMAX?
If I look at the following two images which compares XTOL and TMAX for tri-x, it looks to me like TMAX actually has finer grain?
http://fotoimport.no/images/filmtest/helebildet/TriX400-Xtol-10m.jpg
http://fotoimport.no/images/filmtest/helebildet/TriX400-Tmax-6,5m.jpg
-
<p>Okay everyone, I think I am getting pretty close now. I changed my post processing a bit, and like this a lot better now. I think the only thing I am missing now is to go up to 1600, and more importantly changing up to Rodinal. Thoughts?<br /><br /><img src="http://i.imgur.com/SAmZP8e.jpg" alt="" /></p>
<p>(view this high res here: http://i.imgur.com/SAmZP8e.jpg)</p>
-
Thank you for your answer. So right now I have Rodinal and DDX to choose between. Is Rodinal okay to get the look I am after even
though the film will be pushed to 800-1600? Is 1:50 okay for example?
-
<p>So the fact that I am using DDX now, and not Rodinal, can be the reason to why I am not getting the look I want?</p>
-
<p>By the way, when you suggest Rodinal, do you mean stand developing or just normal development? I read that some people say Rodinal is not good for when you push film, but that's probably because they want a really flat negative? </p>
-
<p>John: Both photos are scanned digitaly. </p>
-
<p>Actually I dont know if its mainly about the grain. I like the deep blacks, the "dirty" look and the huge contrast.</p>
-
<p>Actually Chris, both photographs attached here are taken in 2015 with new tri-x :) </p>
-
<p>Hey everyone.</p>
<p>I have currently made a drastic turn in my photography, and now almost only shoot film, especially tri-x.. The reason for this is that I want the pushed tri-x look, with the deep blacks, the gritty look and the insane contrast. I am pretty close to replicating this look, but I feel that I am missing something?<br /><br />First of all, this is the look I am trying to replicate:<img src="http://i.imgur.com/uzjasWJ.jpg" alt="" width="960" height="636" /></p>
<p>I know this shot is shot at 1600, and for now I have only done 800:<br /><img src="http://i.imgur.com/EU69TPr.jpg" alt="" width="960" height="645" /><br>
So my question is, what am I missing?</p>
<p>I have three teories:</p>
<p>1. I need to push the tri-x even one step further(1600 instead of 800)<br /> 2. I need to change developer? I currently use DDX<br /> 3. There is some magic in post processing I havent quite catched yet.</p>
-
<p>By the way, I meant the 77m adapter..<br /> Also, if I understand correct, the Lee polariser isn't worth purchasing now, as Lee has released a new one called Landscape Polarizer.</p>
<p>I think I get this instead: <img src="http://i.imgur.com/eFL74FA.png" alt="" width="378" height="628" /></p>
-
<p>I am currently on my way to the store, but would like to confirm with the peeps here about the Lee Filters system and the Canon 17-40 first. Is there any vignetting at all using the Lee Filters foundation holder with a 105mm polariser mounted? This is what I'm thinking of purchasing:<br>
(the first product is LEE nd graduated soft kit)</p>
<p><img src="http://1.static.img-dpreview.com/files/p/TS560x560~forums/54556065/6beb64f386d44467a4021088152e721a" alt="" /></p>
<p > </p>
-
<p>It was photographed during the day, but during the wintertime, so was a dull light.</p>
<p>But that must have been really bad luck? Several people never saw this happen once. I guess if I actually purchase the Lee Filter holder with the Lee Filter wide angle adapter, this will prevent this, or at least be better. The Hitech holder even appeared with dark vignetting on 17-20 mm on the 17-40 lens.</p>
-
http://i.imgur.com/MF1fZec.jpg
Here's an example of the spots. This is the first time I used the filter.
-
Hello
I'm finally stepping up my a game and investing in lee filters. I have some questions I hope you can answer:
1. Do anyone of you use the wide hood holder? Is it worth it ? How do you mount the 105mm polarizer ? Can you turn the polarizer with
the hood extended, or do you have to minimize it ?
2. Which filters would you reccomend ? Which grads? I already have a big stopper from hitech, I thougt I would be using this as well.
3 is it really important to clean your filters with cloths before taking a shot? I some times get this circles on my shot I beleive come from
dust on the filter
-
<p>I went with the F-stop, and the large ICU. Finaly something that does fit a lot. </p>
-
<p>Hello guys.. I have several Camera bags, and by now the one I am most pleased with is the Case Logic 206.. </p>
<p>But today, I received my battery grip(holy, it´s a new world!) but none of my bags fit my camera now.</p>
<p><br />I don´t like it when I feel the bag is very tight when I zip close it. It seems to me that when I zip, it adds pressure to the camera..</p>
<p>(and I am done with flipside, I don´t like it so much).</p>
<p>So, which camera bag, can fit a gripped 5d MARK 3? My heaviest lens is 70-200 2.8 IS II.</p>
<p>I do want a snuggy one, so I feel comfortable with my camera being inside there. The Lowerpro bag has way too rough material, and I dont feel comfortable with that. I like the cotton material in the Case Logic.</p>
<p>Hope anyone has some good tips. </p>
-
<p>So how is it compared to the original?</p>
-
<p>So </p>
<p>will actually create more flare than the original ET-74?</p>
-
Fine, or as good as Canon ?
-
Wolf: i got ff, and 70-200L is a ff Lens :-)
-
That is not true.. If the Quality is bad, then it probably will fit bad.. It probably will be wobly.
If the inside material is bad, then it can reflect light.
If the "holes" are too big, then it will be sunflare
-
<p>Hi everyone.</p>
<p>Just one quick question, does anyone own a flower hood(like the 70-200 2.8 hood) on their 4.0? <br /><br />Have anyone actually tried the JJC lens hoods? <br /><br /><br />I see they sell this one, which looks like the 2.8 hood.</p>
-
<p>Actually, I am using crashplan too.</p>
<p>So my server will backup my NAS onto crashplan</p>
TRI-X 400 EI 1600 developed in TMAX, have you tried it?
in Black & White Practice
Posted
I forgot to say that I have actually tried a lab that used DDX, but I liked XTOL more. But TMAX is fluid, so why use DDX
instead of TMAX?