Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2017/06/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Back to back, Shiny side to shiny side. You can wet your finger and see
which side sticks - in the dark.
Emulsion sides out. 35mm only. Does not work with medium format.
--
Mark William Rabiner
Photographer
On 6/15/17, 1:53 PM, "LUG on behalf of lluisripollphotography"
<lug-bounces+mark=rabinergroup.com at leica-users.org on behalf of
lluisripollphotography at gmail.com> wrote:
Mark,
Thanks again! I was sometimes tempted to put 2 films on the same reel,
maybe I wil intend it.
Concerning the water, I don?t know which is the PH of the Barcelona?s
water, for developing I use distilled water (desionized water) mixed with
all chemicals (Developer, Stop Bath and Fixer), the city water was with some
nini partices that made small spots on the film, visibles on scanning
process (not in the darkroom), I suppose it will work well ?
Best!
Lluis
> El 15 juny 2017, a les 18:31, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com>
va escriure:
>
> Lluis I used to roll my film back to back two rolls in the same reel!
And taught my assistants to do it. A few of them were incredulous. I got
this from a Bill Pierce column in Popular photography in the early 70?s it
worked.
> But it makes Kodak?s recommendations as to limits of Xtol and puts
them in the dust.
> I ran 8 rolls of 35mm film in a liter or quart of 1:3 Xtol.
> Then dumped it down the drain. My times where close to what they
should have been.
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Mark William Rabiner
> Photographer
>
> On 6/15/17, 10:40 AM, "LUG on behalf of lluisripollphotography"
<lug-bounces+mark=rabinergroup.com at leica-users.org on behalf of
lluisripollphotography at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Mark,
>
> Thank you for useful information, very interesting to learn it! You
mention Delta 400, yes it is a great film, I?ve not use it after a while and
just the past days I was in the darkroom enlarging, the pics with this one
was very fine.
>
> Your recomendation about testing dilution is also very interesting
to follow.
>
> Thank you
> Lluis
>
>
>
>> El 15 juny 2017, a les 14:25, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com>
va escriure:
>>
>> If you Bing it or Google it for 15 minutes you?ll see the top, smart,
nice, funny spiritual people are all at 1:3. The ones whose prints sold for
the most money and who dressed better.
>> Diluting Xtol 1:3 instead of 1:2 ads a couple of more minutes to it
its way worth it. With that you get better edge caracteristics which is
directly linked to higher dilution. And other advantages I was using 1:2 for
a while and my prints were obviously worse.
>>
>> By the way in my college in the early 70?s in St. Louis, we did us
students who were always in the darkroom an unusual thing which I?d never
heard of other places. We all ran our film in D76 1:2 instead of 1:1. The
students who came in in the beginning of the year and ran the recommended
1:1 and universal default had prints you could spot across the room as being
way less sharp. Way less edge. And way less sharp grain. But a tad less
grain. And they were not very nice people who told bad jokes. It looked like
they were shooting with Spiratone lenes.
>> A good policy is to dilute until you hit a point when you?re seeing
uneven development in your negs. Washed out areas. Then you back up a notch.
But you?ll ahead of time see what everyone else is doing.
>> Neopan Acros 100 Xtol 1:3 16? minutes 70 degrees? agitation every
minute and the first full minute.
>> All film listed here is 1:3 70 degrees F, agitation every minute 10
seconds and the first full minute.
>> Delta 100 14?
>> Delta 3200 16?
>> Delta 400 14? Neopan 1600 RIP my main film when out and about
shooting for myself. Even with a Noctilux. 12 minutes and looks like an
iso 100 film. And here you are shooting it on the street. No tripod. I used
it for on location commercial jobs no flash or tripod. The 100 with the
studio strobes in the studio. Delta 100 from Ilford as just about as good.
>> Neopan Acros 100 16 ? as high a rez film anyone would ever want or
need in Xtol 1:3
>> Get a tank so you can develop 8 rolls at a time or I can see your
point and wanting to keep shorter times.
>> You?ll shoot more with a big boy tank.
>> Pan F 50, they still make it. 12?
>> Tri X 400 11?
>> Tri X Pro 320 in 120 or 220 format, 15?
>> All the other times here is for 35mm format. Times are different for
different formats why no one knows.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Mark William Rabiner
>> Photographer
>>
>> On 6/15/17, 7:32 AM, "LUG on behalf of lluisripollphotography"
<lug-bounces+mark=rabinergroup.com at leica-users.org on behalf of
lluisripollphotography at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Chris, Dan
>>
>> I will do 1+1 on my next two films, I want avoid long develping
times. I?ve used HC110 many years ago, but I liked better ID11/D76
>>
>> Cheers
>> Lluis
>>
>>
>>
>>> El 15 juny 2017, a les 11:49, Christopher Crawford <chris at
chriscrawfordphoto.com> va escriure:
>>>
>>> Its been years since I used Xtol. I never really liked the tonality
as
>>> much as D-76, though Xtol does give finer grain. I got best results
>>> diluted 1+1.
>>>
>>> Be careful with higher dilutions. Kodak, when it first came out,
listed
>>> times for 1+2 and 1+3 dilutions. A lot of photographers got severely
>>> underdeveloped negs with those dilutions, using Kodak?s times. Turns
out,
>>> Xtol cannot stand being diluted that much unless you develop the
film in a
>>> much larger tank than you normally need. I think there had to be
200ml of
>>> stock in the diluted developer for each roll, so for 1+3 developing,
you
>>> could do only one roll in a 32ox tank that could hold four rolls!
>>>
>>> Kodak published the minimum stock quantity needed but a lot of people
>>> ignored it and complained, so they just stopped publishing the times
for
>>> the higher dilutions!
>>>
>>> I actually have a copy in PDF format of the original Xtol info
booklet,
>>> but the times would be off for Kodak films now since Kodak
reformulated
>>> Tri-X and the Tmax films since then. They did publish times for
Ilford
>>> films, which might still work if you?re interested in seeing it.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Chris Crawford
>>> Fine Art Photography
>>> Fort Wayne, Indiana
>>> 260-437-8990
>>>
>>> http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com My portfolio
>>>
>>> http://www.facebook.com/pages/Christopher-Crawford/48229272798
>>> Become a fan on Facebook
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/15/17, 5:15 AM, "LUG on behalf of lluisripollphotography"
>>> <lug-bounces+chris=chriscrawfordphoto.com at leica-users.org on
behalf of
>>> lluisripollphotography at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don?t have a large experience with Xtol, I?ve used for years
ID11/D76.
>>>> I?ve developed my two last films of Bergger Pancro 400 in Xtol
Stock at
>>>> the recomended time, but I?m unhappy with the results. I?ve used it
in
>>>> stock to get the shortest developing time and minimize the grain
effect.
>>>>
>>>> I would like hear your experiences with Xtol, I mainly use FP4 and
HP5.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance
>>>>
>>>> Lluis
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information