Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/12/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On 12/23/06 5:00 PM, "Rei Shinozuka" <shino@panix.com> typed: > the rumor is that the 320 is designed for studio use and has different > response curve than the 400 stuff. i was mildly prejudiced against > the 320 because the late fred picker used to go really rail against > it in his zone VI book, but i have used it here and there without > complaint. > > (from 2000) > http://www.shinozuka.org/monochrome/mono.html > http://www.shinozuka.org/2000.6zoo/zoo.html > > -rei > > if you look like at the book with all the H&R curves in it its not tri x. It may have just as well been called Ektalure. Or some other Kodak name which has made money for them in the past. I use it as I like 220 a lot but don't love it. Feel like just about anything I run in Xtol 1:3 comes out great. Ansel used it which I find spurring. As the curve is not really designed for his use as I understand it. Easier to find than the Ilford options which are probably no longer. I have real nice Hewes 220 reels. If you're gong to run a standard liter tank of film you might as well get 48 shots out of it not 24. That's what I always say. I" sure it looks great in Beutlers and Pyro and others. But I'd not underexpose it. Not over. Mark Rabiner New York, NY 40?47'59.79"N 73?57'32.37"W http://rabinergroup.com/