Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/07/24

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] re: digital noctilux vs 10X faster films?
From: S Dimitrov <sld@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 20:01:01 -0700
References: <Pine.3.89.10107241915.A29262-0100000@post.cis.smu.edu> <3B5E1602.50838CE4@umich.edu> <3B5E2B62.FC71D67B@earthlink.net> <001c01c114b0$870c1480$cfbc3842@triad.rr.com>

I still have the instructions for hydrogen peroxide fume "bath." I never
tried it, but according to the instructions you can boost Tri-X to
16,000 ASA, or thereabout. I got it from Rangefinder Magazine years ago
thinking I was going to redefine available light theory and practise. I
never got past first base in that quest.

  Slobodan Dimitrov


Daniel Post wrote:
> 
> In re the HTML page--- thirty five years ago, we called this "flashing" the
> emulsion- a tenfold increas is about three stops, I don't think we did that
> well, but exposing Tri-X to a green safelight for a few seconds sure did
> inprove the shadow detail of our night-time shots of the high school
> football team!!
> Dan
> t

Replies: Reply from "Daniel Post" <dpost@triad.rr.com> (Re: [Leica] re: digital noctilux vs 10X faster films?)
In reply to: Message from Robert Monaghan <rmonagha@post.cis.smu.edu> ([Leica] re: digital noctilux vs 10X faster films?)
Message from "Dante A. Stella" <dante@umich.edu> (Re: [Leica] re: digital noctilux vs 10X faster films?)
Message from S Dimitrov <sld@earthlink.net> (Re: [Leica] re: digital noctilux vs 10X faster films?)
Message from "Daniel Post" <dpost@triad.rr.com> (Re: [Leica] re: digital noctilux vs 10X faster films?)