Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/01/05
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Phong, I tried Neopan 1600 for the first time at a New Year's Eve celebration. The film was pushed a half stop to 2400 and souped in Diafine. The room where I shot had a high degree of contrast (spot lights in areas of the kitchen and dim pools of ambient light elsewhere). The resulting grain when scanned is tame compared to the Kodak and Ilford 3200 films, at least in my workflow. You lose much of the shadow detail but it delivers a beautiful high contrast look with rich blacks, at least post-Photoshop. My first attempts to develop film at home and the resulting water spots / dust not withstanding, I think I will try to continue to use this combination for all low light indoor photography. If anyone has examples of Neopan 1600 shot outside during normal lighting conditions I would love to take a look. Cheers, Tom M6, Noctilux, Neopan 1600 @ 2400: http://www.availabledarkness.com/nye2004.htm On 1/5/05 9:49 AM, "Phong" <phongdoan@mindspring.com> wrote: > Robert Meier wrote: >> >> ... I have used Neopan 1600 and the results look very close to Tri-X, that >> is, >> no harsh, washed out highlights. I develop it myself so I can control >> what >> I get. You should try doing the processing yourself -- it's amazingly >> simple. > > Bob, and other Neopan 1600 users, > > What developer(s) do you use for Neopan 1600 ? > How well does it work with D76, which is what I > use for B&W (meaning TriX except when the store > is out, in which case it's usually TMY) > > I figure trying Neopan 1600 is a lot cheaper than > upgrading from a Summicron to a Noctilux :-) > > Cheers, > > - Phong > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information