Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/11/25

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] C 41 or conventional B & W film?
From: D Khong <dkhong@pacific.net.sg>
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 06:19:59 +0000
References: <200011230130.RAA22285@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> <000d01c0550b$a7ae67c0$195814cf@z4r4k8>

Tony,

>Given the amount of shooting I do is it worth setting up a darkroom or are
>the C41 films, TCN and XP2, the better way to go. How do these films
>iffer( apart from archival qualities)from their more conventional
>counterparts in respect of the final printed image ?

The TCN and XP2 are chromogenic films suitable for C41 processing and so
would be convenient if you are not into doing your own darkroom work. IMO,
I would prefer the silver halide films for their archival qualities. 

All films are printable when properly exposed. Some people still prefer the
look of the silver halide emulsions. There is no right or wrong.

>Why is it that your Tri-X and HP5, appear to be favoured as against Plus X
>or FP4 ?

Just a matter of speed. I find 400 films more versatile for my style of
available light shooting. From 400, I can push or pull from 100-1600 as I
like.

Dan K.





  

In reply to: Message from "Bill Lawlor" <wvl@marinternet.com> ([Leica] Re: Tri-X)