Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/04/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]henry wrote: > > I think you are right. The whole reason for the existence is this film is > so that wedding guys can offer a "black& white" service and still have > all their film and prints run on a machine. The images will look like B&W > to the bride and her mother. And look like faded crap in 25 years. At > this level it makes perfect sense. But why would I want to pay double > price for a roll of film if I don't work this way? I already have XP2 and > its cheap and excellent quality. > > Its more about Kodak getting your money than it is about anything else. > Short circuiting craft and art. > > That said I'd like to hear your impressions of the film when you get a > chance. > "Yes Folks YOU TOO can have a FAKE Black & White Wedding!" I've got to react a little against this as I've shot quite a few "real" black & white weddings years back, usually 8 rolls of 220 Tri X professional (ASA 320) and would run the film myself. Those negs are of course as good condition now as when they were shot ten or 20 years ago. And I'm sure so are the prints which i printed myself on fixed twice Mulitgrade RC paper. At the rental color lab here U Develop it is a known fact that reprinting a 5 year old C41 colorneg is a bitch. That is because the color layers fade at different speeds creating crossovers. A C41 monochrome neg would last much longer as it's only got one layer and the fading should be easy to correct for. Still I think when someone wants black & white in a wedding it's not because they want a temporary trendy "monochrome effect". They want something that will last! But i should never underestimate the market value of schlock. Mark Rabiner to be continued.... Portland, Oregon USA http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/