[Leica] FYI: Fresh 5222 avail direct from Kodak

[lew1716 at gmail.com (Lew Schwartz)]

Could you make a succinct statement re why you like the Edwal 12/XX combo
so much?

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 3:23 AM, Larry Bullis <kingfisher at 
halcyon.com>wrote:

> Don Cardwell, Lee Lumkin, Thomas Bertilsson and myself did a continuing
> study on Edwal 12 a while back. XX was a film that I took on as my personal
> project. I sort of dropped it because the sole supplier "film emporium"
> couldn't seem to get it any more. Kodak supplying it in bulk? Very hard to
> imagine.
>
> So I have pretty good data with this obscure, obsolete (!) chemistry with
> a pretty obscure, BUT entirely appropriate chemistry. Everyone has
> forgotten about this. I can tell you that it is amazing. But I can't show
> you much. Why? because IF words and images can say the same thing, one of
> them is lying. I do not maintain an online presence, but if you wish, I
> will attempt to put something up you might relate to.
>
> If anyone is really serious about pursuing this (and, I REALLY mean
> REALLY, I'm not interested in casual unless there's enough serious interest
> to support it) I would be interested in either creating a new group to
> study it, or, maybe more likely to bring additional research into the
> existing group. I can't speak for my dearly beloved fellows, but I can't
> imagine them not rising to the concept, even though they may stop short of
> the densitometer. Don't worry, though. I have one or two of those awful
> arcane things, too.
>
> I do think though that this film with this particular amazingly
> appropriate chemistry is something that surpasses any particular existing
> loyalties - especially given the way things are going right now. I think
> that if we have interest in stuff like this, the time is RIGHT NOW to
> express that interest and create whatever body of research we possibly can.
> Otherwise it will go the way of that other XX - the super one, that I miss
> so desperately. It is time for us to speak up and demand that film
> persists. It is stupid to abandon a peak technology for something that
> can't replace it but could provide yet another viable medium. Photography
> as we knew it is like engraving was in 1860 right now. Looked at a dollar
> bill lately?
>
> I don't think that you're going to find a better place to start. The film
> is wonderful. Do you like the 1960's aesthetic, as I do? The research team
> already at hand for the developer is a great place to start. At least, I'm
> ready to go.
>
> The film is one that we've all seen in the movies - but we're sure not
> seeing it any more.
>
> L
>
> On 11/13/11 8:41 PM, lug-request at leica-users.org wrote:
>
>> Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 11:53:32 -0800
>> From: Richard Man<richard at richardmanphoto.**com<richard at 
>> richardmanphoto.com>
>> >
>> Subject: Re: [Leica] FYI: Fresh 5222 avail direct from Kodak
>> To: Leica Users Group<lug at leica-users.org>
>> Message-ID:
>>        <CAF8hL-**FPxy1Q4nAKVAdGvbtbqU7Rssm8_**
>> brDVkDrwHzB6W8e7w at 
>> mail.gmail.**com<CAF8hL-FPxy1Q4nAKVAdGvbtbqU7Rssm8_brDVkDrwHzB6W8e7w at 
>> mail.gmail.com>
>> >
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>>
>>
>> Isn't this the XX film? Phil Forrest gave me a roll (thanks!) in NYC, and
>> it does appear to be close to "old school" film. Of course I really don't
>> know much about old school film but it does the job competently, even in
>> this era of mixed analog/digital workflow. In the "Mark is sometimes right
>> even when he is wrong" department, I have settled on Acros 100 for
>> landscape at ISO100, TriX for people/landscape at ISO320 and low light
>> stuff of Neopan 1600 at ISO1000, all souped in the 2-bath Pyrocat-HD. I
>> would gladly use the XX for Tri-X stuff but the Tri-X works so well that
>> there's hardly any need. I buy the Arista Premium from Freestyle which is
>> Tri-X for just over $3 a roll so the cost is not bad either.
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Lew Schwartz<lew1716 at gmail.com>  
>> wrote:
>>
>>  >  This film c
>>>
>>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See 
> http://leica-users.org/**mailman/listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug>for
>  more information
>