Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/04/01

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

Subject: [Leica] film question
From: simon.apekop at gmail.com (simon jessurun)
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2012 01:12:24 +0600
References: <CAHybWBYopPfiPN7foj6s3gPL+pMnRg0W9MN4nR1MCw9qD8k5DA@mail.gmail.com> <20120401133829.GK69877@selenium.125px.com> <CABmfTOVZJp9TC4ZN0HxLc7J4t-bOVh4ECDpfvxZRgtiHsFPYmg@mail.gmail.com> <20120401170133.GP69877@selenium.125px.com>

thx i liked tmax and across but didnt come close to what i could do
with techpan.Only tried a few rolls but result amazed me . Even on my
consumer scanner no detectable grain at A0 print sizes .
Spur and copex i had forgotten about those .
thank you very much for your comments
simon
almaty \rkz

On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 11:01 PM, Tim Gray <tgray op 125px.com> wrote:
> On Apr 02, 2012 at 01:42 AM +0930, Marty Deveney wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 11:08 PM, Tim Gray <tgray op 125px.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> What always confuses me is that T-MAX 100 wasn't mentioned. ?Also a good
>>> film.
>>
>>
>> I don't mention it because it also has (to me) a somewhat odd spectral
>> response:
>
>
> Understood. ?The T-Max films do have a different spectral sensitivity, but
> in my experience, most films differ in this respect. ?Actually, Techpan had
> extended red response, so if that's important to the original poster, I'm
> not sure any of these is a good match.
>
> I wasn't really only pointing the finger at you. ?More of a statement about
> these kinds of discussions online. ?T-Max 100 always seems to be left out.
>
> I saw a comparison between these four films on rangefinderforum a couple
> months ago. ?Unfortunately, the scans are no longer on line. ?The films
> weren't identified at first and people guessed which picture was which 
> film.
> ?It was interesting to see what people guessed - they placed their favorite
> films with the pictures they liked the most. ?One of the scans looked
> noticeably worse than the others (could have been the development, the 
> film,
> or the scanning) and that was the one that several people said was T-Max.
> ?The one that many people liked the most was the actual T-Max shot though
> most people thought it was something else. ?Once the results were revealed,
> several people were shocked to find out how grainy the PanF+ actually was.
>
> Of course, it was more of a test of those four films, developed in the
> manner they were developed, and scanned the way they were scanned. ?I'm 
> sure
> the one film that looked bad could have looked much better had it been
> developed differently. ?What I thought was interesting is that the test
> seemed to highlight a bias against T-Max films by many.
>
> Obviously, if you don't like T-Max 100, you are free to not like it. ?All 
> of
> these four films are probably different enough from Techpan in various ways
> that I'd rather just mention all four and try not to let my biases enter 
> in.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


Replies: Reply from csaganich at gmail.com (Chris Saganich) ([Leica] film question)
In reply to: Message from simon.apekop at gmail.com (simon jessurun) ([Leica] film question)
Message from tgray at 125px.com (Tim Gray) ([Leica] film question)
Message from benedenia at gmail.com (Marty Deveney) ([Leica] film question)
Message from tgray at 125px.com (Tim Gray) ([Leica] film question)