U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | RE: 3200 SHEET FILM? was Re: Ilford developers

RE: 3200 SHEET FILM? was Re: Ilford developers

  • To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
  • Subject: RE: 3200 SHEET FILM? was Re: Ilford developers
  • From: Liam Lawless <lawless@bulldoghome.com>
  • Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 00:37:56 +0100
  • Comments: "alt-photo-process mailing list"
  • In-reply-to: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAIsdeRRYKtgRkfoAENz0NV7CgAAAEAAAADrvIlGIJpxMho++f6fTHdUBAAAAAA==@caribsurf.com>
  • List-id: alt-photo-process mailing list <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
  • References: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAIsdeRRYKtgRkfoAENz0NV7CgAAAEAAAAFq0YmlpO1RFuPEoqE411r0BAAAAAA==@caribsurf.com><46EC876F.4010907@aol.com><!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAIsdeRRYKtgRkfoAENz0NV7CgAAAEAAAADrvIlGIJpxMho++f6fTHdUBAAAAAA==@caribsurf.com>
  • Reply-to: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
  • Thread-index: Acf6Iz7vZ03t0awpTxWnQ+YCpI4OJQAEPbkgAAWnqeA=


I develop film for a guy who severely underexposes 400 ASA films - says he
exposes at 1600, but he doesn't use a light meter and I reckon it's more
like 3200 or 6400.  I get pretty good results giving them semi-stand
development in deep tanks - 32 mins. in stock D-76 at 21 deg. C, with 30
secs. vigorous agitation every 10 minutes (which allows three short coffee
breaks).  It helps if the images are not too contrasty and shadow detail is
not too important (though I get more than I originally expected), but this
extreme treatment does produce nice, punchy midtones.  A bit grainy, as
you'd expect (well, actually quite a lot grainy), but if you're prepared to
sacrifice 2 or 3 sheets on tests I think you might find something you like.
This chap uses mainly T-Max, Delta and Neopan, btw, and I give them all the
same time.


P.S.  He shoots large amounts of film all over the world, but I've never
seen any with X-ray damage.

-----Original Message-----
From: BOB KISS [mailto:bobkiss@caribsurf.com] 
Sent: 18 September 2007 21:46
To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
Subject: RE: 3200 SHEET FILM? was Re: Ilford developers

	Thanks for the reply.  I never thought about leaky film holders.
3200 is three stops faster than 400.  It would make sense to spend a few
sheets testing holders.  As you say, we photographers should be able to deal
with that.  Can you imagine what you could do with those three extra stops
in 8X10 or even 5X7?  The really large format folks (11X14 and up) would
love it even more.
	Are you on the Large Format Forum?  If so, might you post the
question to them?  They would be a natural market for 8X10 or larger 3200
speed film.  As Richard Knoppow pointed out, Ilford won't stock and sell it
if there isn't any market.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Burkholder [mailto:fdanb@aol.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 2:34 PM
To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
Subject: Re: 3200 SHEET FILM? was Re: Ilford developers

Hey Bob,

Good question. Years ago I asked a Kodak rep about that (and you know 
their reputation for farsightedness) and, if memory serves, he said 
something about fog concerns with leaky film holders and such. Seems 
like that shouldn't be their concern as much as the photographer's.

I never shot the Delta 3200 but I loved the tonal characteristics of 
Kodak's TMZ film at EI 800. Wonderful toe and shoulder behavior.


BOB KISS wrote on 9/14/07, 2:43 PM:

 >     I have always wondered why neither Kodak nor Ilford have sold their
 > 3200 speed films as sheet films.  Where else would one really LOVE the
 > speed
 > and not care as much about the grain?  Don't you find that curious?
 >     I lust after Delta 3200 in 8X10.  Can you imagine that speed?  Even
 > after filter factors and/or bellow factors you could use a high F# and
 > not
 > have to expose for seconds!
 >     Anyone know anyone at those places?  Maybe we could induce them to
 > make some in those sizes?
 >         CHEERS!
 >             BOB



__________ NOD32 2539 (20070918) Information __________

This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.