|
BANME.sh posted:I got them developed and scanned at London Drugs, and paid a couple bucks extra for the "premium" high res scans. The files are roughly 6000x4000 pixels, but at full zoom they look extremely pixelated. Is this standard fare for labs such as this? Would love to hear from somebody who has used London Drugs specifically. I think they most likely don't understand the limitations of their scanner. They're selling you scans that are ~4000dpi but were probably 2000dpi or 2400dpi optically and interpolated up to 4000dpi. That's one way to make them look like they do. The original scans might have EXIF data identifying the scanner used. That's where I'd start googling to see.
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2013 13:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 03:35 |
|
|
Thanks again for the developing tips on my mishap, they turned out alright.  Has anyone developed Tri-X @ 3200 before using HC-110? I'm not seeing any times on digital truth. Dilution B at 2400 shows 16 min. If I went up to ~25 min would that be about right or is that pushing it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2013 19:38
|
|
|
pootiebigwang posted:Has anyone developed Tri-X @ 3200 before using HC-110? I'm not seeing any times on digital truth. Dilution B at 2400 shows 16 min. If I went up to ~25 min would that be about right or is that pushing it? I haven't done exactly that, but I have done Tri-X at 6400 in Ilfotec HC, which is comparable to HC-110. But heck if I can remember the time I used. (Probably 15 or 16 minutes in 1+15 dilution.) However 2400 is just 1/3 stop less than 3200, so I'd think 25 minutes would be excessive if you base it off that time. Try 18 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2013 20:21
|
|
|
I developed Tri-X at 3200 with HC110 - I think my solution was 1:9 or 1:10, and about 12 minutes, agitating every other minute.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2013 21:03
|
|
|
You can also try doing semi-stand, maybe 2 hours with 1+100, agitating every 20 minutes. (That would probably give less contrasty negatives than a "fast" development to high speed otherwise would.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2013 21:08
|
|
|
pootiebigwang posted:Thanks again for the developing tips on my mishap, they turned out alright. I've had decent results using 1:100 dilution semi-stand for 2 hours, maybe 1 inversion every 10 minutes or so. It's time consuming, but it definitely looked better than shorter development times with higher concentrates.  
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2013 21:22
|
|
|
I ended up getting a refund for those lovely scans. The lady who I was talking to seemed to understand the problem (she opened up one of the scans on their computer and I pointed out the problem). Doubt it'll have any benefit for future customers, though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 00:04
|
|
|
Anyone here pushed hp5+ to 3200/6400? I've a few rolls of film lying around that I know were massively underexposed, but kept around anyway, and seeing as I need new developer I reckon I might as well get microphen and go for it. Unless anyone suggests another dev. I'm kind of interested in rodinal + stand developing, but I'm not so sure about the results being great.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 17:23
|
|
|
I'm not really that fond of Microphen. It does the job, but you may just as well use a highly concentrated liquid developer like HC110 or Rodinal. Microphen is one-shot as well, but you have more freedom in varying development speed vs. grain with the liquid ones.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 17:37
|
|
|
Rodinal and stand development is probably your best bet. Unlike Ilford's Delta line, HP5+ doesn't take well to being pushed, so you'll want to develop as slowly as possible to smooth out the grain and tonality.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 18:30
|
|
|
LFK posted:Rodinal and stand development is probably your best bet. Unlike Ilford's Delta line, HP5+ doesn't take well to being pushed, so you'll want to develop as slowly as possible to smooth out the grain and tonality. Really? I've pushed Hp5+ to 800 and 1600 before with no problems at all, it's just with the extra stops I figured I'd ask first.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 18:51
|
|
|
LFK posted:Rodinal and stand development is probably your best bet. Unlike Ilford's Delta line, HP5+ doesn't take well to being pushed, so you'll want to develop as slowly as possible to smooth out the grain and tonality. I've shot HP5 at 3200 lots of times using both HC-110 and XTOL.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 19:03
|
|
|
The Clit Avoider posted:Really? I've pushed Hp5+ to 800 and 1600 before with no problems at all, it's just with the extra stops I figured I'd ask first. I also won't deny the possibility that I'm just a screwup.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 19:04
|
|
|
 Dilmaghani Rugs, NY by JaundiceDave, on Flickr portra 400 w/ 6x12 back
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 21:36
|
|
|
If you're stand developing in 1+100 rodinal and going for a really excessive push, I'd try it for 1.5-2hrs rather than the usual 1hr. And if it's 120 film, dilute it down to1+125 as well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 21:41
|
|
|
Cheers Spedman, it is indeed 120 film. I think I will try both HC-110 and Rodinal seeing as I have more than the one roll. That'll sort me for developer for a while too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 23:24
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:I ended up getting a refund for those lovely scans. The lady who I was talking to seemed to understand the problem (she opened up one of the scans on their computer and I pointed out the problem). Doubt it'll have any benefit for future customers, though. Hey, at least they gave you the refund. That puts them ahead in my book - willingness to cop to a mistake is worth a lot to me. There's a London Drugs here I might let play with a couple of rolls, I'll get them to provide scans because now I'm curious if they have a premium scan that's actually worth it. Genderfluid posted:
I like this, rather a lot. What camera? (If you talked about it in the MF & LF thread, I'll just go there).
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 00:21
|
|
|
I'm going in the rain with a camera full of Rollei Ortho 25 tomorrow. Anything I should know about this stuff?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 02:40
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:I'm going in the rain with a camera full of Rollei Ortho 25 tomorrow. Anything I should know about this stuff? It doesn't see red, so if you happen to shoot any people it'll really bring out the fine lines in their faces, it's a great film with nearly zero grain.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 06:25
|
|
|
Spedman posted:If you're stand developing in 1+100 rodinal and going for a really excessive push, I'd try it for 1.5-2hrs rather than the usual 1hr. And if it's 120 film, dilute it down to1+125 as well. Why do you dilute further for 120? There's still the same surface area with the same emulsion exposed to the same chemicals, it doesn't seem like you'd want to just arbitrarily change the concentration of the developer. But yeah, Rodinal is 1:30 at +1 and 2h at +2 in my experience.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2013 22:32
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Why do you dilute further for 120? There's still the same surface area with the same emulsion exposed to the same chemicals, it doesn't seem like you'd want to just arbitrarily change the concentration of the developer. When I first started doing stand development some guy over at the rangefinder forum did an effort post about the topic and found that he got better results at 1:125 with 120 film, using the same process times as he did with 1:100 for 35mm. I think what he was trying to do was use the same amount of developer for both the film sizes, as 120 film needs a greater volume of solution in the tank. This means the same film area exhausts the same volume of Rodinal, at least that was my understanding of it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 02:00
|
|
|
Where is everybody buying expired film these days? I used to see slightly expired stuff at B&H and such but it's never the deep discounted couple years old stuff. Local craigslist is a bust. Ebay didn't return any results but maybe I'm not doing it right. A picture for your time:  Untitled by voodoorootbeer, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 13:05
|
|
|
Cool pic, genuinely thought they were buildings.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 13:08
|
|
|
voodoorootbeer posted:Where is everybody buying expired film these days? I used to see slightly expired stuff at B&H and such but it's never the deep discounted couple years old stuff. Local craigslist is a bust. Ebay didn't return any results but maybe I'm not doing it right. Deals can be had on ebay but not nearly as many as a few years ago. Now every thing is "rare", "lomo" and priced accordingly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 14:01
|
|
|
I buy all my expired film from
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 16:17
|
|
|
I
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 17:11
|
|
|
How do I get in on this action?
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 17:13
|
|
|
QPZIL posted:How do I get in on this action? Accept the Pentax ME Super as your Lord and Savior. Or threaten to send 8th-samurai an N5005.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 17:33
|
|
|
Don't... tempt me pseudonordic! I dare not take it. Not even to keep it safe. Understand, pseudonordic. I would use the Pentax ME Super from a desire to do good... But through me, it would wield a power too great and terrible to imagine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 17:35
|
|
|
Hey the only expired stuff left in my freezer is some Kodachrome and ten sheets of Ektachrome that expired in '99. Oh and the 20 rolls of Portra 100T that I am hoarding.....FOREVER.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 17:42
|
|
|
My local camera shop gave me this yesterday: For freeeeeeeeee. Been in their fridge for god knows how long, expired between 97-2007. I didn't even know a 1600 speed slide film even existed. Totally made my day though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 17:58
|
|
|
QPZIL posted:Don't... tempt me pseudonordic! I dare not take it. Not even to keep it safe. Understand, pseudonordic. I would use the Pentax ME Super from a desire to do good... But through me, it would wield a power too great and terrible to imagine. That's what I do with my ME Super. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 18:14
|
|
|
pootiebigwang posted:Sweet swag :') 1600 slide is crazy, please post results when you shoot it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 18:30
|
|
|
I shot some expired 1600 fuji super HG film. At 1200. It was still underexposed   1600superhg050.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr  1600superhg043.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr Dr. Despair fucked around with this message at 21:46 on Mar 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2013 18:28
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:I shot some expired 1600 fuji super HG film. At 1200. This turned out pretty good I think.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2013 18:43
|
|
|
Santa is strapped posted:This turned out pretty good I think. Thanks, a large portion of the roll wound up like this though (camera is apparently finicky about loading spooling the film)  1600superhg057.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr  1600superhg061.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr And just posting the rest  1600superhg051.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr  1600superhg053.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr  1600superhg056.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2013 00:43
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:Thanks, a large portion of the roll wound up like this though (camera is apparently finicky about loading spooling the film) that's pretty awesome
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2013 00:59
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:Thanks, a large portion of the roll wound up like this though (camera is apparently finicky about loading spooling the film) Looks pretty cool. I should try spooling my 6x9 folder too little some time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2013 01:01
|
|
|
Really the worst part was the foot of unused film at the end of the roll. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2013 01:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 03:35 |
|
|
Look man, I was drunk when bought that 1600 film on ebay. Looks like I should shoot the two or three rolls I have left at 800.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2013 03:16
|
|