Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/11/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Mike Durling wrote: > > B.D. > I think your memory is better than mine. It was about 25-30 years ago when > I experimented with pushing film and the like. I can't remember what I > used. I know it wasn't diafine but maybe I tried Acufine. I know that I > did use a lot of 2475 recording film. Talk about grain! Ah the good old > days. . . > Mike D > > -----Original Message----- > From: B. D. Colen <bdcolen@earthlink.net> > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> > Date: Tuesday, November 23, 1999 12:29 PM > Subject: RE: [Leica] deserve to be green > > > > > > >> B.D. > >> The lore from 20 years ago had it that Acufine would push > >> Tri-X to 1200 ASA > >> (not ISO back then!) and that Diafine would do about 2400. I > >> never tried > >> them myself. Maybe somebody else around here has. Might be > >> fun to compare > >> with modern soups. > >> Mike D I'm going to venture a semi-educated guess and suggest that it was the two- bath developer that was used to push Tri-X (Diafine? Check out http://www-cad.eecs.berkeley.edu/~dealfaro/photo.html for more info). If I understand correctly, development of the shadows will continue beyond development of the highlights, because more developer from the first bath has been soaked up into the latent image. Another link to check is: http://www.algonet.se/~bengtha/photo/rit.edu/FAQ33.txt Do a search for 'Diafine' in the text. M. - -- Martin Howard | Visiting Scholar, CSEL, OSU | What boots up must come down. email: howard.390@osu.edu | www: http://mvhoward.i.am/ +---------------------------------------