[Leica] XP-2

[Mark Rabiner]

XP-2 was marketed as a variable iso film Which could be shot at any iso you
want. As it turned out if you didn't shoot it at exactly iso 400 you were in
trouble and if you over exposed it by over a stop you'd get bullet proof
negs which required in hour in your enlarger to print. xP1 was worse but xp2
was still bad. Under exposing it was like under exposing any other black and
white film. Not so great.
But if you didn't make big mistakes the neg you'd get could compete with
much slower silver films in any developer dilution combination you'd like.
The film made fools of us in the darkroom. Plus you could bring it into any
minilab and get back a dry strip of negs in 20 minutes uncut if they could
remember not to do it.

On 11/25/15 2:58 PM, "Ken Carney" <kcarney1 at cox.net> wrote:

> $500 doesn't buy much of a power cord :).
> http://www.essentialsound.com/essence-power-cord/
> 
> Ken
> 
> On 11/25/2015 1:22 PM, Bill Pearce wrote:
>> No you're missing out on the meaningless bullshit. It's like guys that
>> think their stereo sounds better with a $500 power cord from the amp
>> to the wall, but are clueless about the wires from the wall to the
>> breaker box to the street. It's like the monks arguing over the number
>> of angels on the head of a pin. I was just thinking, as I read the
>> business about Samsung exiting the camera business how things have
>> changed. I think that today you can get results from FF/APS/MFT that
>> are more than good enough for anyone.
>> 
>> -----Original Message----- From: Dante Stella
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 12:48 PM
>> To: Leica Users Group
>> Subject: Re: [Leica] XP-2
>> 
>> Does a 1/3 stop even make a difference? Or is 320 a lucky number that
>> people remember from TXP120? Serious question.
>> 
>> I see references everywhere to rating 400 film of various types at
>> 320, and it seems a bit strange because few film cameras are accurate
>> and consistent enough to predict a blanket rule with an almost
>> insignificant amount of overexposure. Virtually anything with a leaf
>> shutter is already overexposing by at least that much -- meaning that
>> "320" really means 250, and 2/3 stop is much more noticeable than 1/3.
>> And with all mechanical shutters, each speed can have a different
>> error in a different direction. The other thing is that C-41
>> processing, at least commercial processing, is not that consistent
>> either.
>> 
>> And having put a densitometer to silver negatives exposed at one-third
>> stop increments with very accurate electronic shutters, it does not
>> tend to drag meaningful detail out of the toe. And it makes zero
>> difference to tones on a straight-line film like TMY. Maybe things are
>> different with XP2, but even eyeballing its curve, it seems doubtful
>> that (an actual) 1/3 stop would do very much.
>> 
>> Or maybe I'm missing the magic here? I take the suggestion seriously
>> coming from you, but it still seems slightly superstitious.
>> 
>> Best,
>> Dante
>> 
>>> On Nov 25, 2015, at 12:35 PM, Paul Roark <roark.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Overexposure lowers grain but also lowers contrast.  I used 320
>>> most.  You
>>> can use the typical negative film approach -- expose for the shadows and
>>> let the highlights go where they may.  It's hard to burn them out
>>> with that
>>> film.
>>> 
>>> Paul
>>> www.PaulRoark.com
>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Bryk Oliver
>>>> <oliverbryk at comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> How should I rate XP-2 if none of the images will be printed?
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks for any advice based on experience,
>>>> 
>>>> Oliver
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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




-- 
Mark William Rabiner
Photographer
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/