Desmolicious Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
Alpha_Geist wrote:
I just finished developing two more rolls from my Samsung AF Slim Zoom. A roll of TriX400 and Catlabs 320 Pro, both shot at box speed and using the Cinestill DF96 monobath. Both rolls were shot back to back in the same light, however, the Catlabs negatives are super thin! The TriX400 looks super healthy. The negatives are both hang drying in my bathroom right now, but I’m already thinking that I’m going to have to work some magic during scanning and post in order to get those Catlabs shots to somewhere decent.
Anyone have any history with the Catlabs 320 Pro film? I have a hunch I’ll have to use another developer to get more acceptable results…that’s if I even pick up another roll (as that was my only one).
...Show more →
When I shot catlabs 320 I have to expose it as an ISO 160 film to get good results. No issues w df96 Monobath, the problem is them calling it a 320 film.
|