Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/12/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>at 800 ASA, you might also consider Fuji Neopan 1600 which in my testing >has a true speed of around 800 or so, so no pushing would be required for >your application. >-rei Which would make sense why I always got contrasty negs from Neopan rated at 1600 and developed normally, since if that was true I was pushing it one stop. After some testing, I finally got it right for the Fuji: I cut normal development time (10 mins in Xtol 1:2 @ 68°, as per Anchell & Troop) by 30% and use light agitation (3 gentle Slinky-style inversion + a soft twist per minute after the 1st minute of agitation). Comes out perfect every time now. Guy >> From: "Oliver Bryk" <oliverbryk@attbi.com> >> >> To plan some work in available semi-darkness with my Summicron-M f/2, I >> asked my friendly b&w custom processor for his views on rating Tri-X at ISO >> 800 (Jim Mitchell's M.O. for his rock photos). Pierre said that in his >> experience HP5+ was more amenable to pushing than Tri-X. >> I would be curious about any confirming or dissenting views regarding the >> specific choice between these two emulsions. >> Oliver Bryk >> >-- >To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html