Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/11/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Daniel, All I can say is that when I forgot to put the hardener in I had much more time behind the healing brush fixing long one to two pixel wide scratches on my negatives, especially ones that I pulled out of the printfiles again to scan another negative in the strip. Looking at the negatives with a 10X loop doesn't find any mark but the scanner sure does. So, for me, hardener is a necessity. Don don.dory@gmail.com On 11/12/06, Daniel Ridings <dlr@dlridings.se> wrote: > > Don Dory wrote: > > Jeffery, > > With scanners picking up any flaw in a negative I've found that I can > not > > afford to not use a hardening fixer. Just pulling a negative out of the > > sleeve can leave enough of a scratch that I have to heal the wound > before I > > print it. > > Don, I always thought that the hardener only mattered while the negative > was wet/damp. Once dried, it is hard again. > > I know Fomapan is so soft when it is wet that a hardener is recommended > by many. I don't use one. I am just very careful with wet negatives. I > haven't noticed anything once they are dry and sometimes they can really > get held back in the negative sleeves by suction. > > But thanks for the warning. I'll keep my eyes open. > > > As to Rodinal, with the higher speed films I mostly use, Xtol 1:2 or 1:3 > > works better magic for me. But I think that I will try Acros in Rodinal > > 1:50 to see if I can get better tonality than I can with Xtol. I think > > that > > the increased edge effects will work to my advantage. I'll find out in > the > > next couple of weeks. Heresy, I will be using a tripod with an M and > > modern > > glass to see just what can be done on some abstract images with 35mm. > > I don't know ... Xtol 1:2 and 1:3 is pretty nice. Acros is also very > nice right out of the box. > > Recently I've shot a couple with Rodinal, well, Calbe R09, the original > "Rodinal". It is different, but I don't know how. Its standard dilution > is 1:40 as an equivalent of 1:50. > > Last week's paw: > > http://www.dlridings.se/paw/2006/44.html > > But probably more significant (that is, Rodinal's contribution to the > result), the portrait of Ewa: > > http://www.dlridings.se/paw/2006/41.html > > I don't think I'll use it for 35mm anymore. It is a bit too much of a > good thing. > > Daniel > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >