Progress
20/04/09 21:48
This weekend I finished testing the new NX 50 ASPH. This is a lens that needs some reflection to be put in the right perspective.
In a totally different domain, I also finalised my tests of the Prescytol EF. I used the recommended partial stand agitation and the results look extremely good. The flyer of the Photographers Formulary inc. is extremely positive, but I have a few reservations here. No doubt that this developer is an important addition to the chemical darkroom. I am standardising on TMax 100, this film I know very well.
And I have a long history of comparative data with this film.
Stand development is a technique with strong adherents and equally strong disbelievers. In the BJP an article appeared long ago where Rodinal in 1:300 and stand development was promoted as the best for Technical Pan. Jukka Vatanen has a site devoted to this kind of development. Worth a look and a consideration.
Bad news is that my professional shop (one of the biggest in Amsterdam) has now stopped selling film because of low demand. Professionals do not use film anymore. Artists may continue to use it. And some die-hards like myself.
I put the Tmax film in my MP with Summilux-M 1.4/50 ASPH. To get to the essence of photography this combo is superb.
Development with the Heiland TAS developer is a piece of cake: within half an hour I have four films on the drying rack. Less pictures (you are restricted to 36 negatives per film) might be helpful in producing better pictures. Uncle Anselm (as Mike Johhston refers to him) is right!
In the digital realm I am overwhelmed with inkjet baryta papers: Epson, Hahnemeuhle. Innova, Ilford, you name it and they have baryta papers.
Baryta in the chemical darkroom implied superior shadow reproduction, but is it very difficult to get fine separations in the zones 1 to 3 in the digital printing.
Sometimes you wonder why everybody so speedily discarded the chemical darkroom.
There is not that much difference in darkroom expertise and Raw development expertise. I am not claiming that one needs 10.000 hours to become a master in whatever craft you wish to embark upon. But I am surprised about the short time period that some reviewers deem enough to dare to conclude their studies and state results. In the past products were on the market for decades and one could spend years to get acquainted with a combination of products. Now the life span is a few months and within this short timeframe one has to make a statement.
I really doubt whether one can a good insight in a product in the short time available.
The beauty of the chemical darkroom is the slow speed of introduction of new products and the longer time frame one gets to study the characteristics.
I have always the feeling that I have too less time to get to the true soul of a product.
Even a film like TMax 100 has still secrets fro me.
In a totally different domain, I also finalised my tests of the Prescytol EF. I used the recommended partial stand agitation and the results look extremely good. The flyer of the Photographers Formulary inc. is extremely positive, but I have a few reservations here. No doubt that this developer is an important addition to the chemical darkroom. I am standardising on TMax 100, this film I know very well.
And I have a long history of comparative data with this film.
Stand development is a technique with strong adherents and equally strong disbelievers. In the BJP an article appeared long ago where Rodinal in 1:300 and stand development was promoted as the best for Technical Pan. Jukka Vatanen has a site devoted to this kind of development. Worth a look and a consideration.
Bad news is that my professional shop (one of the biggest in Amsterdam) has now stopped selling film because of low demand. Professionals do not use film anymore. Artists may continue to use it. And some die-hards like myself.
I put the Tmax film in my MP with Summilux-M 1.4/50 ASPH. To get to the essence of photography this combo is superb.
Development with the Heiland TAS developer is a piece of cake: within half an hour I have four films on the drying rack. Less pictures (you are restricted to 36 negatives per film) might be helpful in producing better pictures. Uncle Anselm (as Mike Johhston refers to him) is right!
In the digital realm I am overwhelmed with inkjet baryta papers: Epson, Hahnemeuhle. Innova, Ilford, you name it and they have baryta papers.
Baryta in the chemical darkroom implied superior shadow reproduction, but is it very difficult to get fine separations in the zones 1 to 3 in the digital printing.
Sometimes you wonder why everybody so speedily discarded the chemical darkroom.
There is not that much difference in darkroom expertise and Raw development expertise. I am not claiming that one needs 10.000 hours to become a master in whatever craft you wish to embark upon. But I am surprised about the short time period that some reviewers deem enough to dare to conclude their studies and state results. In the past products were on the market for decades and one could spend years to get acquainted with a combination of products. Now the life span is a few months and within this short timeframe one has to make a statement.
I really doubt whether one can a good insight in a product in the short time available.
The beauty of the chemical darkroom is the slow speed of introduction of new products and the longer time frame one gets to study the characteristics.
I have always the feeling that I have too less time to get to the true soul of a product.
Even a film like TMax 100 has still secrets fro me.