Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/02/06

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Recommendations re: Kodak 3200 ASA
From: chs2018 at med.cornell.edu (Chris Saganich)
Date: Mon Feb 6 10:22:10 2006
References: <43E44556.2060001@gmail.com> <B9C6C3CE-2E7E-4685-B6EE-6A1FE1205BC4@pandora.be> <43E55E4F.70301@gmail.com> <15271210.1139106748845.JavaMail.s_gregory1@mac.com> <22c93b290602051052w128f1026n591b9505943269b8@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20060205212353.0313a3e0@screengang.com> <22c93b290602051546r17c62861hcef8b9c78405f709@mail.gmail.com> <003101c62ab0$00423ef0$2ee76c18@ted> <9b678e0602051800o70bb115cmc9784997cc5e28c6@mail.gmail.com>

I would second that, Kodak 3200 isn't what I would call a 3200 speed 
film.  It does look good at 1600, but the Neopan at 1600 in Xtol is by far 
the best combo speed wise, and it pushed well also.

Chris

At 09:00 PM 2/5/2006, you wrote:
>You know, you could all shoot Neopan 1600 which developed in Xtol at a
>dilution of 1-3 is really a 1600 speed film with normal density curve.
>32200 is doable as a normal push at about 20% increase of time.  Grain is
>fine and the tonality is still good.
>
>Just my 2 cents about a really underrated film.
>
>Don
>don.dory@gmail.com
>
>
>On 2/5/06, Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca> wrote:
> >
> > Matt quit while yer a head! ;-)
> > ted
> > Ted Grant Photography Limited
> > 1817 Feltham Road
> > Victoria BC  V8N 2A4
> > 250-477-2156
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Matt Powell" <wooderson@gmail.com>
> > To: "Leica Users Group" <lug@leica-users.org>
> > Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2006 3:46 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Leica] Recommendations re: Kodak 3200 ASA
> >
> >
> > > On 2/5/06, Didier Ludwig <rangefinder@screengang.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >... neither Delta 3200 nor TMax 3200 is a true 3200-speed film.
> > >> Matt
> > >> What do you ecaxtly mean with "not a true 3200-speed film"?  Just
> > >> curious.
> > >> Didier
> > >
> > > However ISO is measured (I believe it's shadow density at
> > > something-or-other blah blah blah, I don't do testing of that kind),
> > > neither of the 3200 films is a 'true' 3200 ISO (as Tri-X is a true 400
> > > in certain developers, etc.). TMZ or Delta3200 at 3200 is underexposed
> > > (and then push-processed).
> > >
> > > This is all badly explained, I'm sure.
> > >
> > > --
> > > MP
> > > wooderson@gmail.com
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Leica Users Group.
> > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> >
>
>_______________________________________________
>Leica Users Group.
>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information

Chris Saganich, Sr. Physicist
Weill Medical College of Cornell University
New York Presbyterian Hospital

Ph. 212.746.6964
Fax. 212.746.4800
A0049 



In reply to: Message from evanowski at gmail.com (Edmund Evanowski) ([Leica] poorly framed & composed snaps?)
Message from philippe.orlent at pandora.be (Philippe Orlent) ([Leica] poorly framed & composed snaps?)
Message from evanowski at gmail.com (Edmund Evanowski) ([Leica] poorly framed & composed snaps?)
Message from s_gregory1 at mac.com (Scott Gregory) ([Leica] Recommendations re: Kodak 3200 ASA)
Message from wooderson at gmail.com (Matt Powell) ([Leica] Recommendations re: Kodak 3200 ASA)
Message from rangefinder at screengang.com (Didier Ludwig) ([Leica] Recommendations re: Kodak 3200 ASA)
Message from wooderson at gmail.com (Matt Powell) ([Leica] Recommendations re: Kodak 3200 ASA)
Message from tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant) ([Leica] Recommendations re: Kodak 3200 ASA)
Message from don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory) ([Leica] Recommendations re: Kodak 3200 ASA)