Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/01/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]If you mean Tmax 3200 at 1600, I use that in Microphen undiluted for quite acceptable grain. But, it's pretty soft. No zap. On low contrast subjects, I find it doesnt always hold up, and you have to seriously compensate in printing. (That's another reason I liked the Tri-X at 800). LB On Lundi, janvier 26, 2004, at 07:02 PM, Steve Barbour wrote: > on a related issue...for shooting... in available darkness, how about > Tri X 3200 shot at 1600 and processed normal...I have been told this > works great... very fast, with good results... anybody know?.....good > way to get you to 1600 ?...Steve > > >> Very true. >> >> ======================================= >> I have heard that chromogenic films like XP2 is captured better by >> scanners >> compared to silver based films. Don't know how true this is. >> >> Dan K. >> >> At 04:50 AM 1/27/04, you wrote: >>> What are you scanning with? My Minolta Scan Dual II chokes on Tri-X >>> and >> >>> spews out blotchy scans. Some weird reaction of the scanner res and >>> the >> >>> grain pattern in Tri-X. Everything else scans fine. Too bad Tri-X is >>> my >> >>> B&W film of choice! >>> >>> John Collier >>> >>> On Jan 26, 2004, at 12:36 PM, Adam Bridge wrote: >>> >>>> I did some playing with Tri-X at 800 and 1600. >>> >>> -- >>> To unsubscribe, see >>> http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe, see >> http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html >> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe, see >> http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html