Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/11/14
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The biggest place for data I've found is compiled here: http://www.project-double-x.org/ Tom Abrahamson and a few others have shown beautiful results with D-76, HC110 and Adox Borax MQ. I have yet to try the latter. Phil Forrest -----Original Message----- >From: charcot <charcot at comcast.net> >Sent: Nov 14, 2011 11:01 AM >To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> >Subject: Re: [Leica] FYI: Fresh 5222 avail direct from Kodak > > Well I made the plunge and bought a 400 ft roll. Anyone have any >idea of ISO and dev. times for HC110? > >ernie > >On 11/14/2011 8:56 AM, Dante Stella wrote: >> Where are you finding 100-150ft rolls? That's the max size that fits the >> mainstream 35mm units. Are they short ends? Or is there some massively >> larger loader that take the 400-footers? >> >> Interesting on the coating; I looked this up, and they apparently use >> *less* antihalo coating on the b/w cinema film than they do b/w still >> film. >> >> Best, >> Dante >> >> On Nov 14, 2011, at 9:44 AM, Lew Schwartz<lew1716 at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I haven't noticed any coatings. Nothing comes off in processing and the >>> negs are as clear as any other film I process. Fits in all my bulk >>> loaders >>> ok, too. It does have motion picture sprocket holes, slightly different >>> from what we usually get for 35mm still film/cameras, but this hasn't >>> produced any problems running through my M's or Voigtlander's. >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 9:10 AM, Dante Stella<dstella1 at >>> ameritech.net>wrote: >>> >>>> And isn't it the same xx that has the nasty remjet coating and comes >>>> only >>>> in 400ft rolls? That size doesn't exactly drop into a Watson loader. >>>> >>>> Dante >>>> >>>> On Nov 14, 2011, at 8:36 AM, Lew Schwartz<lew1716 at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Could you make a succinct statement re why you like the Edwal 12/XX >>>>> combo >>>>> so much? >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 3:23 AM, Larry Bullis<kingfisher at halcyon.com >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Don Cardwell, Lee Lumkin, Thomas Bertilsson and myself did a >>>>>> continuing >>>>>> study on Edwal 12 a while back. XX was a film that I took on as my >>>> personal >>>>>> project. I sort of dropped it because the sole supplier "film >>>>>> emporium" >>>>>> couldn't seem to get it any more. Kodak supplying it in bulk? Very >>>>>> hard >>>> to >>>>>> imagine. >>>>>> >>>>>> So I have pretty good data with this obscure, obsolete (!) chemistry >>>> with >>>>>> a pretty obscure, BUT entirely appropriate chemistry. Everyone has >>>>>> forgotten about this. I can tell you that it is amazing. But I can't >>>> show >>>>>> you much. Why? because IF words and images can say the same thing, one >>>> of >>>>>> them is lying. I do not maintain an online presence, but if you wish, >>>>>> I >>>>>> will attempt to put something up you might relate to. >>>>>> >>>>>> If anyone is really serious about pursuing this (and, I REALLY mean >>>>>> REALLY, I'm not interested in casual unless there's enough serious >>>> interest >>>>>> to support it) I would be interested in either creating a new group to >>>>>> study it, or, maybe more likely to bring additional research into the >>>>>> existing group. I can't speak for my dearly beloved fellows, but I >>>>>> can't >>>>>> imagine them not rising to the concept, even though they may stop >>>>>> short >>>> of >>>>>> the densitometer. Don't worry, though. I have one or two of those >>>>>> awful >>>>>> arcane things, too. >>>>>> >>>>>> I do think though that this film with this particular amazingly >>>>>> appropriate chemistry is something that surpasses any particular >>>> existing >>>>>> loyalties - especially given the way things are going right now. I >>>>>> think >>>>>> that if we have interest in stuff like this, the time is RIGHT NOW to >>>>>> express that interest and create whatever body of research we possibly >>>> can. >>>>>> Otherwise it will go the way of that other XX - the super one, that I >>>> miss >>>>>> so desperately. It is time for us to speak up and demand that film >>>>>> persists. It is stupid to abandon a peak technology for something that >>>>>> can't replace it but could provide yet another viable medium. >>>> Photography >>>>>> as we knew it is like engraving was in 1860 right now. Looked at a >>>> dollar >>>>>> bill lately? >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't think that you're going to find a better place to start. The >>>> film >>>>>> is wonderful. Do you like the 1960's aesthetic, as I do? The research >>>> team >>>>>> already at hand for the developer is a great place to start. At least, >>>> I'm >>>>>> ready to go. >>>>>> >>>>>> The film is one that we've all seen in the movies - but we're sure not >>>>>> seeing it any more. >>>>>> >>>>>> L >>>>>> >>>>>> On 11/13/11 8:41 PM, lug-request at leica-users.org wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 11:53:32 -0800 >>>>>>> From: Richard Man<richard at richardmanphoto.**com< >>>> richard at richardmanphoto.com> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] FYI: Fresh 5222 avail direct from Kodak >>>>>>> To: Leica Users Group<lug at leica-users.org> >>>>>>> Message-ID: >>>>>>> <CAF8hL-**FPxy1Q4nAKVAdGvbtbqU7Rssm8_** >>>>>>> brDVkDrwHzB6W8e7w at mail.gmail.**com< >>>> CAF8hL-FPxy1Q4nAKVAdGvbtbqU7Rssm8_brDVkDrwHzB6W8e7w at mail.gmail.com> >>>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Isn't this the XX film? Phil Forrest gave me a roll (thanks!) in NYC, >>>> and >>>>>>> it does appear to be close to "old school" film. Of course I really >>>> don't >>>>>>> know much about old school film but it does the job competently, even >>>> in >>>>>>> this era of mixed analog/digital workflow. In the "Mark is sometimes >>>> right >>>>>>> even when he is wrong" department, I have settled on Acros 100 for >>>>>>> landscape at ISO100, TriX for people/landscape at ISO320 and low >>>>>>> light >>>>>>> stuff of Neopan 1600 at ISO1000, all souped in the 2-bath >>>>>>> Pyrocat-HD. I >>>>>>> would gladly use the XX for Tri-X stuff but the Tri-X works so well >>>> that >>>>>>> there's hardly any need. I buy the Arista Premium from Freestyle >>>>>>> which >>>> is >>>>>>> Tri-X for just over $3 a roll so the cost is not bad either. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Lew Schwartz<lew1716 at gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> This film c >>>>>>>> >>>>>> ______________________________**_________________ >>>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>>> See http://leica-users.org/**mailman/listinfo/lug< >>>> 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