Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/07/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Are you still using the development times for the old style emulsion? I really didn't notice much of difference between the old and new, except that the newer emulsion seems to be finer grained and needs a little longer in the fixer. When I was still using Nacco Super76 (D76 clone) I found the times suggested on the bottle to work well. I think I cut the development time a tad, to keep the contrast down. feli On Jul 4, 2005, at 12:24 PM, Daniel Ridings wrote: > I've never been able to accept that I couldn't get the "new" 400TX to > work for me like I could the old one from two or three years ago. So > now and then I buy 10 rolls or so and give it a try again. Most of the > time I've ended up giving the remainder away after failing for a few > rolls. > > I got a question on another list about how 400tx compares to HP5+. So > I tried again. > > http://www.dlridings.com/paw2005/05v27-0002.jpg > > M2, 50/2.8 Elmar (old), 1/60 @ 4.0, HC110 dil B, 5 1/2 minutes at > 68 degrees > > It was the shot of Ewa in the restaurant that brought on the question. > I posted it yesterday, but put it here for easy reference. Both shots > are with window lighting. > > http://www.dlridings.com/paw2005/26alt1.html > > I could probably make friends with 400TX again. Don't know if I will. > HP5+ handles easier for me in a variety of conditions, but 400TX feels > better. I felt like a failed photographer if I couldn't get decent > results with a well known and reliable film. > > Best, > Daniel > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > ________________________________________________________ feli2@earthlink.net 2 + 2 = 4 www.elanphotos.com no archive