Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/04/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]"Hans-Peter.Lammerich" wrote: > > It is the preceived opinion that conventional, silver based b&w negatives will > last longer than chromogenic films. Kodak's web site on their Tmax400CN avoids a > clear statement. What says theory? What shows experience? > > Hans-Peter My theory and experience says the issue with color neg not being silver is mainly one of each of the separate color layers fading at different speeds creating crossovers. This makes for impossible to print negs not too far down the line after they are processed. (except for photoshop) But black and white chromegic films are not going to have that problem as they only have one layer. Some slight fading would be inconsequential. I don't use the stuff but I don't look down at people who do, I hear it's a lot easier to scan that silver based materials. That's just hearsay. But I shot some XP2 once and had an embarrassingly difficult telling it (on the same head shot shoot) from some Agfapan 25 I lovingly processed myself in Rodinal. That's the difference between f22 and F5.6! 4 stops! (25 to 400) Hard to swallow that kind of quality at that speed. My highlight separation was a little better with the Agfapan but it didn't look that much sharper and the grain was not less; might have been more. Mark Rabiner