Post your recent film shots!
p.1265 #1Post your recent film shots!
A few years ago, I started experimenting with developing Tri-X in Rodinal. Posting on a different forum, my early post were receiving less than favorable reviews, so I asked for assistance. A member gave me the some recommendations which helped me get to my goal of a decent negative. I reduced the ISO by one stop, got rid of my yellow filter and was gentle with my agitations. Those suggestions reduced visible grain and improved tonal range while still giving me the sharpness Rodinal provides.
Thank you for the testing and posting your results. It always good to have a path to follow. Lately I've been using Adox XT-3 but still have Rodinal on hand and like the results.
These were from last year but since both my scanning gear and technique have gotten better, I scanned them today. M4-2, Voigtlander 35 1.4 Nokton Classic SC V2, Tri-X @ ISO 200, Rodinal 1:50
Evergreen Aviation and Space Museum, McMinville, Oregon:
SR-71Terrestrial Camera:
Pratt & Whitney J58 jet engine:
Thank you for the testing and posting your results. It always good to have a path to follow. Lately I've been using Adox XT-3 but still have Rodinal on hand and like the results.
These were from last year but since both my scanning gear and technique have gotten better, I scanned them today. M4-2, Voigtlander 35 1.4 Nokton Classic SC V2, Tri-X @ ISO 200, Rodinal 1:50
Evergreen Aviation and Space Museum, McMinville, Oregon:
SR-71Terrestrial Camera:
Pratt & Whitney J58 jet engine:
Jul 07, 2024 at 04:42 PM
p.1265 #6Post your recent film shots!
Fujicolor 400 negative film (expired) _ Rollei Prego AF35 P&S
 |
||
 © ocean2059 2024 |
||
|
|
||
 © ocean2059 2024 |
||
|
|
||
 © ocean2059 2024 |
||
|
Jul 07, 2024 at 07:07 PM
p.1265 #8Post your recent film shots!
My favorite thing about using Rodinal with Tri-X is how the antihalation backing turns the developer a royal purple color.
Jul 07, 2024 at 11:16 PM
p.1265 #9Post your recent film shots!
Nikon F2P / Nikkor 85f1.8 / Pro Image 100
Red Coat. by Henry Beckmeyer, on Flickr
Red Coat. by Henry Beckmeyer, on FlickrJul 08, 2024 at 06:50 AM
p.1265 #10Post your recent film shots!
ocean2059 wrote:
Fujicolor 400 negative film (expired) _ Rollei Prego AF35 P&S
The Rollei Prego AF35 is the Samsung AF Slim re-badged.
Superb cameras.
Fujicolor 400 negative film (expired) _ Rollei Prego AF35 P&S
The Rollei Prego AF35 is the Samsung AF Slim re-badged.
Superb cameras.
Jul 08, 2024 at 10:26 AM
|
p.1265 #13Post your recent film shots!
Nikon FG, 45 2.8 AI-P, C200
From a distance this pic is acceptable. But looking at it closely it is not sharp anywhere due to shutter shock/mirror slap that this camera is notorious for. Unless speeds are above 1/60 sec you will not get sharp sharp pics.
Bummer. Size and feel is just great, and it is such a cute little SLR. But I think it's time for me to sell this one on as I don't mind carrying a little extra junk in the trunk if it means I can use speeds 1/60 and under.
From a distance this pic is acceptable. But looking at it closely it is not sharp anywhere due to shutter shock/mirror slap that this camera is notorious for. Unless speeds are above 1/60 sec you will not get sharp sharp pics.
Bummer. Size and feel is just great, and it is such a cute little SLR. But I think it's time for me to sell this one on as I don't mind carrying a little extra junk in the trunk if it means I can use speeds 1/60 and under.
Jul 08, 2024 at 10:40 AM
p.1265 #14Post your recent film shots!
Desmolicious wrote:
Nikon FG, 45 2.8 AI-P, C200
From a distance this pic is acceptable. But looking at it closely it is not sharp anywhere due to shutter shock/mirror slap that this camera is notorious for. Unless speeds are above 1/60 sec you will not get sharp sharp pics.
Bummer. Size and feel is just great, and it is such a cute little SLR. But I think it's time for me to sell this one on as I don't mind carrying a little extra junk in the trunk if it means I can use speeds 1/60 and under.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53844051955_beb80e814e_c.jpg
I'm sure you've played with (probably have) an FM2/FE2/FM3a. Their shutter release is nice. Their wind action feels cheap (like winding plastic gears...).
I am always so pleased with the F6 shutter/mirror feel/sound. So (relatively) quiet and smooth. The price you pay for it being such a large lad.
Nikon FG, 45 2.8 AI-P, C200
From a distance this pic is acceptable. But looking at it closely it is not sharp anywhere due to shutter shock/mirror slap that this camera is notorious for. Unless speeds are above 1/60 sec you will not get sharp sharp pics.
Bummer. Size and feel is just great, and it is such a cute little SLR. But I think it's time for me to sell this one on as I don't mind carrying a little extra junk in the trunk if it means I can use speeds 1/60 and under.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53844051955_beb80e814e_c.jpg
I'm sure you've played with (probably have) an FM2/FE2/FM3a. Their shutter release is nice. Their wind action feels cheap (like winding plastic gears...).
I am always so pleased with the F6 shutter/mirror feel/sound. So (relatively) quiet and smooth. The price you pay for it being such a large lad.
Jul 08, 2024 at 11:04 AM
p.1265 #16Post your recent film shots!
_jim_ wrote:
From a distance this pic is acceptable. But looking at it closely it is not sharp anywhere due to shutter shock/mirror slap that this camera is notorious for. Unless speeds are above 1/60 sec you will not get sharp sharp pics.
Bummer. Size and feel is just great, and it is such a cute little SLR. But I think it's time for me to sell this one on as I don't mind carrying a little extra junk in the trunk if it means I can use speeds 1/60 and under.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53844051955_beb80e814e_c.jpgI'm sure you've played with (probably have) an FM2/FE2/FM3a. Their shutter release is nice. Their wind action feels cheap (like winding plastic gears...).
I am always so pleased with the F6 shutter/mirror feel/sound. So (relatively) quiet and smooth. The price you pay for it being such a large lad.
Yeah, I've been through all those, and they are much better to use than the FG. Actually I should say they don't suffer from shutter/mirror shock!
But I sold them all off settling on the F2 (AS and plain prism), F3P and F6. Those to me are the high water mark for Nikon film SLRs. I bought the FG later because I was curious and the deal was too cheap to refuse!
The dampening in the F6 is legend - wait for it - dary. And it is absolutely bonkers that an amateur about to break any moment P&S like a Contax T2/3 costs more than an F6.
edit - forget to mention I also use two N80s. At $20-$30 each how could I not! Great camera.
Desmolicious wrote
Nikon FG, 45 2.8 AI-P, C200From a distance this pic is acceptable. But looking at it closely it is not sharp anywhere due to shutter shock/mirror slap that this camera is notorious for. Unless speeds are above 1/60 sec you will not get sharp sharp pics.
Bummer. Size and feel is just great, and it is such a cute little SLR. But I think it's time for me to sell this one on as I don't mind carrying a little extra junk in the trunk if it means I can use speeds 1/60 and under.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53844051955_beb80e814e_c.jpg
I am always so pleased with the F6 shutter/mirror feel/sound. So (relatively) quiet and smooth. The price you pay for it being such a large lad.
Yeah, I've been through all those, and they are much better to use than the FG. Actually I should say they don't suffer from shutter/mirror shock!
But I sold them all off settling on the F2 (AS and plain prism), F3P and F6. Those to me are the high water mark for Nikon film SLRs. I bought the FG later because I was curious and the deal was too cheap to refuse!
The dampening in the F6 is legend - wait for it - dary. And it is absolutely bonkers that an amateur about to break any moment P&S like a Contax T2/3 costs more than an F6.
edit - forget to mention I also use two N80s. At $20-$30 each how could I not! Great camera.
Jul 08, 2024 at 11:19 AM
p.1265 #17Post your recent film shots!
Desmolicious wrote:
From a distance this pic is acceptable. But looking at it closely it is not sharp anywhere due to shutter shock/mirror slap that this camera is notorious for. Unless speeds are above 1/60 sec you will not get sharp sharp pics.
Bummer. Size and feel is just great, and it is such a cute little SLR. But I think it's time for me to sell this one on as I don't mind carrying a little extra junk in the trunk if it means I can use speeds 1/60 and under.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53844051955_beb80e814e_c.jpgI'm sure you've played with (probably have) an FM2/FE2/FM3a. Their shutter release is nice. Their wind action feels cheap (like winding plastic gears...).
I am always so pleased with the F6 shutter/mirror feel/sound. So (relatively) quiet and smooth. The price you pay for it being such a large lad.Yeah, I've been through all those, and they are much better to use than the FG. Actually I should say they don't suffer from shutter/mirror shock!
But I sold them all off settling on the F2 (AS and plain prism), F3P and F6. Those to me are the high water mark for Nikon film SLRs. I bought the FG later because I was curious and the deal was too cheap to refuse!
The dampening in the F6 is legend - wait for it - dary. And it is absolutely bonkers that an amateur about to break any moment P&S like a Contax...Show more →
I got an F100, FM2, F3 and some manual zooms in a generic pelican case for $300 at a garage sale some years ago...can't imagine getting so lucky now...
The F3 wind action is the nicest of any camera that I've ever used.
_jim_ wrote
Desmolicious wrote
Nikon FG, 45 2.8 AI-P, C200From a distance this pic is acceptable. But looking at it closely it is not sharp anywhere due to shutter shock/mirror slap that this camera is notorious for. Unless speeds are above 1/60 sec you will not get sharp sharp pics.
Bummer. Size and feel is just great, and it is such a cute little SLR. But I think it's time for me to sell this one on as I don't mind carrying a little extra junk in the trunk if it means I can use speeds 1/60 and under.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53844051955_beb80e814e_c.jpg
I am always so pleased with the F6 shutter/mirror feel/sound. So (relatively) quiet and smooth. The price you pay for it being such a large lad.
But I sold them all off settling on the F2 (AS and plain prism), F3P and F6. Those to me are the high water mark for Nikon film SLRs. I bought the FG later because I was curious and the deal was too cheap to refuse!
The dampening in the F6 is legend - wait for it - dary. And it is absolutely bonkers that an amateur about to break any moment P&S like a Contax...Show more →
I got an F100, FM2, F3 and some manual zooms in a generic pelican case for $300 at a garage sale some years ago...can't imagine getting so lucky now...
The F3 wind action is the nicest of any camera that I've ever used.
Jul 08, 2024 at 11:42 AM
p.1265 #18Post your recent film shots!
theHUN wrote:
Summary: HP5 wins this round.
Details:
In the interest of resolution (with fine grain films) I switched over (from DD-X) to Rodinal last year. Results with slower speed films were great, and even though I liked the results with Delta 400, some people had commented that Rodinal was perhaps not the best choice for films with ISO400 and faster. But I really wanted to simplify my inventory, so DD-X had to go (in the long term), and I therefore had to characterize ISO400 films in Rodinal to see just what the tradeoffs were. In addition to simplifying my inventory of chemistry, I also wanted to explore the possibility of simplifying my film stock inventory. Specifically, I have shot Delta 3200 with good results, but I use it so infrequently, that it might be simpler to just use an ISO400 film and push it two stops. Once again, perhaps Rodinal is not the best choice for this, but I was curious enough to try it out.
The first step was to pick a few ISO400 film stocks. I am a lazy snob, so I only considered Delta 400, T-max 400 (TMY-2), HP5, and Tri-X 400 (400TX). Next I picked a recipe that seemed like it should give me something close enough for ISO400: Rodinal, 1+60 [15 mL + 900 mL], 20 min, 20 C. Finally, I characterized the film curve for each stock. The goal was to measure the actual film speed (defined as film density 4 stops below normal exposure = 0.1) and contrast. I was hoping to find one film that was not only fast but also had a low/normal enough contrast, so that push processing to ISO1600 would still keep the film density of highlights reasonable.
Sample image of how data were collected
https://geza.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-10/p529340407-6.jpg
Curves (Rodinal, 1+60 [15 mL + 900 mL], 20 min, 20 C). Rolls were developed one at a time.
https://geza.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-10/p2133893-5.jpg
Film: Speed/contrast
Delta 400: 280/0.9
T-max 400 (TMY-2):320/1.11
HP5: 400/0.57
Tri-X 400 (400TX): 200/0.66
Well, HP5 wins this round, although I should add:
- This is only Step 1 where I am looking at speed and contrast. I am not considering grain or performance on actual subjects.
- Delta 400 is a known-good performer. I like the grain I get with my scanner though the scanner probably does not actually resolve the grain.
- T-max 400 gave physically flatter negatives making them easier to load into the scanner right after they have dried.
- Tri-X 400 smells pretty bad.
The next step is to compare HP5 and Delta 3200 in Rodinal, 1+25 [20 mL + 500 mL], 20 min, 20 C. If they are close enough in speed, I might do a comparison on actual subjects. If Delta 3200 is at least a full stop faster than HP5 I will probably give up on simplifying my film stock and instead continue using Delta 3200 for low light situations. But if Delta 3200 does not even reach ISO1000, I will perhaps just stick to my Q2M. Stay tuned.Are you exposing at box speed or paying the Rodinal one stop penalty?I am exposing at ISO400 (box speed), and I shoot an array as shown below to determine base + fog, what exposure gives density = 0.1 (= film speed), and Zone 8 density.
https://geza.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-10/p604621648-5.jpg
So if I meter at ISO400, and Zone 1 (4 stops below normal exposure) gives me a film density of 0.1 then the film is indeed ISO400. On the other hand, if I only get a film density of 0.1 with an extra stop of exposure then the film speed is in fact ISO200.
This is amazingly technical and impressive. Thank you for sharing. People are smart.
A couple of years ago I lucked into 3 x 100' rolls of T-Max 400 near expiry. I developed a lot of it with Rodinal. Generally, I metered for 320 and developed for 400. The results were very nice - rodinal sharpness, with T-Max gradation and resolution. I could use this combo forever.
Jenny by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
Nikon F2, Nikkor 55mm f/3.5, Kodak T-Max 400, Rodinal 1:50
Jenny by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
Zeiss Ikon ZM, Voigtlander 35mm f/2 Ultron VM, Kodak T-Max 400, Rodinal 1:50
Molly by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
Zeiss Ikon ZM, Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4 Nokton V1 SC, Kodak T-Max 400, Rodinal 1:50
Last Leaves of Fall by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
Nikon F2, Nikkor 55mm f/3.5, Kodak T-Max 400, Rodinal 1:50
madNbad wrote
theHUN wrote
Rolls 154, 155, 156, and 157: Evaluating Delta 400, T-max 400, HP5, and Tri-X for ISO 400.Summary: HP5 wins this round.
Details:
In the interest of resolution (with fine grain films) I switched over (from DD-X) to Rodinal last year. Results with slower speed films were great, and even though I liked the results with Delta 400, some people had commented that Rodinal was perhaps not the best choice for films with ISO400 and faster. But I really wanted to simplify my inventory, so DD-X had to go (in the long term), and I therefore had to characterize ISO400 films in Rodinal to see just what the tradeoffs were. In addition to simplifying my inventory of chemistry, I also wanted to explore the possibility of simplifying my film stock inventory. Specifically, I have shot Delta 3200 with good results, but I use it so infrequently, that it might be simpler to just use an ISO400 film and push it two stops. Once again, perhaps Rodinal is not the best choice for this, but I was curious enough to try it out.
The first step was to pick a few ISO400 film stocks. I am a lazy snob, so I only considered Delta 400, T-max 400 (TMY-2), HP5, and Tri-X 400 (400TX). Next I picked a recipe that seemed like it should give me something close enough for ISO400: Rodinal, 1+60 [15 mL + 900 mL], 20 min, 20 C. Finally, I characterized the film curve for each stock. The goal was to measure the actual film speed (defined as film density 4 stops below normal exposure = 0.1) and contrast. I was hoping to find one film that was not only fast but also had a low/normal enough contrast, so that push processing to ISO1600 would still keep the film density of highlights reasonable.
Sample image of how data were collected
https://geza.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-10/p529340407-6.jpg
Curves (Rodinal, 1+60 [15 mL + 900 mL], 20 min, 20 C). Rolls were developed one at a time.
https://geza.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-10/p2133893-5.jpg
Film: Speed/contrast
Delta 400: 280/0.9
T-max 400 (TMY-2):320/1.11
HP5: 400/0.57
Tri-X 400 (400TX): 200/0.66
Well, HP5 wins this round, although I should add:
- This is only Step 1 where I am looking at speed and contrast. I am not considering grain or performance on actual subjects.
- Delta 400 is a known-good performer. I like the grain I get with my scanner though the scanner probably does not actually resolve the grain.
- T-max 400 gave physically flatter negatives making them easier to load into the scanner right after they have dried.
- Tri-X 400 smells pretty bad.
The next step is to compare HP5 and Delta 3200 in Rodinal, 1+25 [20 mL + 500 mL], 20 min, 20 C. If they are close enough in speed, I might do a comparison on actual subjects. If Delta 3200 is at least a full stop faster than HP5 I will probably give up on simplifying my film stock and instead continue using Delta 3200 for low light situations. But if Delta 3200 does not even reach ISO1000, I will perhaps just stick to my Q2M. Stay tuned.
https://geza.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-10/p604621648-5.jpg
So if I meter at ISO400, and Zone 1 (4 stops below normal exposure) gives me a film density of 0.1 then the film is indeed ISO400. On the other hand, if I only get a film density of 0.1 with an extra stop of exposure then the film speed is in fact ISO200.
This is amazingly technical and impressive. Thank you for sharing. People are smart.
A couple of years ago I lucked into 3 x 100' rolls of T-Max 400 near expiry. I developed a lot of it with Rodinal. Generally, I metered for 320 and developed for 400. The results were very nice - rodinal sharpness, with T-Max gradation and resolution. I could use this combo forever.
Jenny by Jim Fischer, on FlickrNikon F2, Nikkor 55mm f/3.5, Kodak T-Max 400, Rodinal 1:50
Jenny by Jim Fischer, on FlickrZeiss Ikon ZM, Voigtlander 35mm f/2 Ultron VM, Kodak T-Max 400, Rodinal 1:50
Molly by Jim Fischer, on FlickrZeiss Ikon ZM, Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4 Nokton V1 SC, Kodak T-Max 400, Rodinal 1:50
Last Leaves of Fall by Jim Fischer, on FlickrNikon F2, Nikkor 55mm f/3.5, Kodak T-Max 400, Rodinal 1:50
Jul 08, 2024 at 11:51 AM
p.1265 #19Post your recent film shots!
_jim_ wrote:
This is amazingly technical and impressive. Thank you for sharing. People are smart.
A couple of years ago I lucked into 3 x 100' rolls of T-Max 400 near expiry. I developed a lot of it with Rodinal. Generally, I metered for 320 and developed for 400. The results were very nice - rodinal sharpness, with T-Max gradation and resolution. I could use this combo forever.
Was looking up my old Tmax400 pictures assuming I was using the same combo, but it was actually D76. I might need to come back to developing B&W ....
Great pictures as usualy @Jim!
This is amazingly technical and impressive. Thank you for sharing. People are smart.
A couple of years ago I lucked into 3 x 100' rolls of T-Max 400 near expiry. I developed a lot of it with Rodinal. Generally, I metered for 320 and developed for 400. The results were very nice - rodinal sharpness, with T-Max gradation and resolution. I could use this combo forever.
Was looking up my old Tmax400 pictures assuming I was using the same combo, but it was actually D76. I might need to come back to developing B&W ....
Great pictures as usualy @Jim!
Jul 08, 2024 at 12:07 PM
p.1265 #20Post your recent film shots!
Desmolicious wrote:
The Rollei Prego AF35 is the Samsung AF Slim re-badged.
Superb cameras.
Yes, I was looking for a Samsung AF Slim after you had recommended it a while back but found a good copy of the Rollei Prego AF 35 instead. I like the Schneider designed 35mm f/3.5 lens in it (I believe it's a Tessar-type). The sound/noise in focus, shutter, film advance is a bit loud and I have to disengage the auto-flash setting every time I turn the camera on. Other than that, it's an excellent P&S.
Edited on Jul 08, 2024 at 01:55 PM · View previous versions
ocean2059 wrote
Fujicolor 400 negative film (expired) _ Rollei Prego AF35 P&SSuperb cameras.
Yes, I was looking for a Samsung AF Slim after you had recommended it a while back but found a good copy of the Rollei Prego AF 35 instead. I like the Schneider designed 35mm f/3.5 lens in it (I believe it's a Tessar-type). The sound/noise in focus, shutter, film advance is a bit loud and I have to disengage the auto-flash setting every time I turn the camera on. Other than that, it's an excellent P&S.
Edited on Jul 08, 2024 at 01:55 PM · View previous versions
Jul 08, 2024 at 01:49 PM