Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/03/15

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Negative versus Reversal
From: Rolfe Tessem <rolfe@ldp.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 10:01:01 -0500
References: <20020314225025.20961.cpmta@c014.snv.cp.net>

- --On Thursday, March 14, 2002 02:50:25 PM -0800 Doug Herr 
<telyt@earthlink.net> wrote:

> On Thu, 14 March 2002, Rolfe Tessem wrote:
>
>>
>> So, with the choice of incredibly sharp and fine-grained film (e.g. Fuji
>> Reala), the ability to deal with mixed lighting sources, the ability to
>> handle scenes with a wider range than 3-4 stops, the ease with which the
>> scanner handles shadow detail, the universal availability of inexpensive
>> processing, and the ability to output easily in any format I choose, the
>> choice is a no-brainer.
>>
>> It's color negative all the way.
>>
>> As always, YMMV and I look forward to hearing dissenting views.

>
> How will the current crop of color negative films look after 50 years'
> storage?

I don't know -- ask me in 50 years? :-)

We do know that the archival properties of the newer films, both negative 
and reversal, are better than the older ones. I have no idea where the 
information is quantified though.

I process my own C41 in a Jobo ATL-1000, and I do a couple of things that 
are supposed to make the archival properties better. First, I finish with a 
stabilizer bath which many minilabs omit. Second, the film is dried in a 
film dryer with forced hot air. According to Jobo/Tetenal, "cooking" the 
stabilizer into the film like this helps achieve maximum archival stability.

- --
Rolfe Tessem
rolfe@ldp.com
Lucky Duck Productions, Inc.

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from Doug Herr <telyt@earthlink.net> (Re: [Leica] Negative versus Reversal)