Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/03/30

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

Subject: [Leica] three questions: C41 b/w film; Mamiya DM22; why no US version of GF1 w 20mm kit?
From: passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro)
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 09:53:57 -0400
References: <19b6d42d1003272213l512b02f2m2f28f7ddcd82d132@mail.gmail.com> <4BB1575D.9010500@cox.net> <19b6d42d1003292005i232b2aa2oe312204e8a044fba@mail.gmail.com> <23AC56C7-DE39-4BED-8054-85224F6B94F1@gmail.com> <19b6d42d1003292032q7ba0c0f3n8ca6371c24bc0973@mail.gmail.com> <p0623091dc7d74a97cb93@192.168.1.5>

Henning,
Thanks. You'll see I told off old Steve about his merde on the LUG thing.
On the contrast front I was talking results after scanning. I take the
images for processing and scanning. And my sense of the Ilford was, to put
it in my terms which are not perhaps comprehensible -- but everything tended
to look "grayed out."

But who can tell what's the processing mistake, what's the scanning mistake,
what's the photographer's mistake? I mean, you could probably tell. But I
couldn't.

Meanwhile someone else said the Kodak has less contrast than Ilford, not
more.

VMany thankis, again,

V

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 2:33 AM, Henning Wulff <henningw at 
archiphoto.com>wrote:

> At 11:32 PM -0400 3/29/10, Vince Passaro wrote:
>
>> Nah you misunderstood: "that's why I'm asking people's opinion's...."
>> about
>> which one they think is best. The Kodak or the Ilford. Kodak seems to be
>> winning which was my experience. The Ilford was too low contrast in my
>> experience.
>>
>>
>
>
> If you won't develop Tri-X then I take it you don't do enlarging. In that
> case low contrast is your friend, as scanners are much more forgiving of 
> low
> contrast than medium or high contrast.
>
> I've used various C41 films; Kodak (various flavours), Ilford XP and XP2
> and Agfa's. All work fine for scanning. For printing I like the Ilford XP2
> best if I do it myself. Photofinishers generally like the Kodak films
> better.
>
>
> --
>
>   *            Henning J. Wulff
>  /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
>  /###\   mailto:henningw at archiphoto.com
>  |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


Replies: Reply from steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] three questions: C41 b/w film; Mamiya DM22; why no US version of GF1 w 20mm kit?)
Reply from tcharara at mac.com (Tarek Charara) ([Leica] three questions: C41 b/w film; Mamiya DM22; why no US version of GF1 w 20mm kit?)
In reply to: Message from passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro) ([Leica] three questions: C41 b/w film; Mamiya DM22; why no US version of GF1 w 20mm kit?)
Message from kcarney1 at cox.net (Ken Carney) ([Leica] three questions: C41 b/w film; Mamiya DM22; why no US version of GF1 w 20mm kit?)
Message from passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro) ([Leica] three questions: C41 b/w film; Mamiya DM22; why no US version of GF1 w 20mm kit?)
Message from steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] three questions: C41 b/w film; Mamiya DM22; why no US version of GF1 w 20mm kit?)
Message from passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro) ([Leica] three questions: C41 b/w film; Mamiya DM22; why no US version of GF1 w 20mm kit?)