Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/07/23

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Comment on T400CN
From: kabob@tiac.net (Bob Keene/Karen Shehade)
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 11:36:56 -0400

Personally, I've always preferred the XP2...and find the XP2 Super to be
much better.
I have my lab print my wedding proofs on color paper with a brown tone
(semi-"sepia") and the XP2 looks wonderful! My clients are always curious
how I give them "that timeless look"...

Bob Keene
>
>Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 15:58:19 -0400
>From: "Paul Schiemer" <schiemer@magicnet.net>
>Subject: [Leica] Comment on T400CN
>
>Didn't personally shoot the stuff, just ran into it in the communal darkroom
>where I do some work.  Guy was having a fit trying to get a print out of it.
>Due in part to his lack of expertise, and because the negs are just so
>'different'.
>I'd been curious about it, how convenient it must be, eh?  So I decided to
>help him.  All but one of the images were fashion shots outdoors, bright
>sun, reflector, and bracketed. We picked one of a woman in leather jacket to
>print through (onto Kodak B&W paper).
>
>I pride myself on being able to judge a neg quickly and, at least, get
>within the ball park with an initial test exposure.  Then I dial it in with
>a 2 sec. step test strip.  Not with this stuff!
>
>It's just plain weird to asses, which will be overcome with experience I
>suppose.  Even with the test strip it was hard to judge where the optimum
>print would land.  I guess I was looking for the 'telltales' found in normal
>B&W- the contrast ratio, shadow detail and specular highlights.  Sure, it's
>all there, but not like a 'real' neg.  [Holes have a tone.]
>
>The resultant print was muddy and flat, by comparison to the TriX neg I was
>pulling off my enlarger next door.  Different images mind you, different
>exposures too, but there's a quality missing in the T400CN print.
>Maybe there's a special way to dial out the mask?  I read the instructions
>and, typical Kodak, very basic; no real clue on how to get them to be snappy
>prints (not like 'snappy' shots).  "Punch", 'snappy', whatever you call it.
>
>It's probably a good thing to have on hand just in case a story editor or
>designer asks the pro to do some B&W during the same shoot.  You can expose
>it and run it at the same time your color stuff is getting done.
>And it probably won't be around long- the way things come and go at big
>yellar.
>
>no archive