Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/09/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Don, I'm going to have to try that too. I use 1:1 for 35mm and 1:2 for 120 ... mostly because I've been trying to hold fast to the 100ml per roll rule. I like 1:2 better and the Neopan-1600-time-of-the-year is approaching (it doesn't get light until 6:30 am now and gets dark at about 6:30 pm). I agree with your taste for negatives. Thin, but shadow detail ... for me, that's the easiest to work with. Thanks! Daniel On Sun, 7 Sep 2003, Don Dory wrote: > Daniel, > It wasn't untried. Mark R. has been using just this combination for > years. Last, as I knew the lighting she would be shooting under, a > strongly compensating developer would be just the ticket. > > Also, I have been using a stronger dilution Xtol for two years on Neopan > 1600 and always found good "thick" negatives. As with all B&W films, up > to the point of losing shadow detail a thinner negative provides a > cleaner image. > > But I agree with your point that for important work, going off the deep > end on something completely new is rather foolish. > > Don > dorysrus@mindspring.com > > Daniel wrote in part: > And you tested an untried combination on your daughter's film?! Your > boss's I could understand, but your daughters :) > > Daniel > > -- > 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 > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html