Alan and list, I printed some of the negatives from the copy film last night and was very disapointed. Like I said before, the parts that had reasonable density on the neg were pretty impressive, but the great majority of the frames were either almost blocked up or super thin. I have to compress the contrast somehow. I'm going to take one more stab at the Rodinal, and my guess is to try less development. Maybe go from 10 min to 6 or 8 min. After that, I still have the message from Rick Dingus outlining the use of HC110 for this purpose, and will give that a try in any case. I also had something from Masrc, but I can't find that now. Marc, if you wouldn't mind sending that again, I'd love to have it. Kind of fun, all it costs is the developer. I really have to finish my 4x5 project now, since being able to develop one sheet at a time (under a red safelight!) would make the experimentation easier.
Gene Alan Zinn wrote: > > At 12:14 PM 11/13/01 -0800, you wrote: > >Hello all, > > > >I've just finished developing a roll Kodak High Resolution Aerial Copy > >film. I had cut and rolled a strip of it and put it in my old > >Rolleiflex. I took a series of shots of the landscape in front of my > >house to get an idea of the film speed. The resulting negatives are > >certainly interesting. The cloudy sky is very dense compared to the > >ground, which I expected. But something strange has happened I cannot > >explain. I have much more detail of the houses etc. at 8 and 4 sec and > >also at 1/2 sec. At 2 sec and especially at 1 sec the ground detail is > >almost gone. This film has no antihalation backing. To look at it it > >is yellow and almost transparent. Could this be halation? I have no > >idea what halation looks like on the film. If anyone is curious, the > >images that look like they are exposed about right have amazing detail. > >I didn't know the little Tessar in my Rolleiflex was that good. I will > >let you all know what happens when I try to print these. That should > >happen in a couple days. I have 500ft. of this stuff, and my plan was > >to cut a bunch of 4x5 sheets from it. Looks like it works well at about > >ASA 2-6. I developed it in Rodinal for 10 min at 20 deg C. > > > >Gene Johnson > >_______________________________________________ > >Cameramakers mailing list > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >http://rmp.opusis.com/mailman/listinfo/cameramakers > > > > > Gene, > I used a variations of this film years ago. It is phenomenal for certain > light situations but without the halation backing it is quite squirrely. I > think it is more sensitive to I/R. It is best in overcast light and does > well with foggy weather. It has a pronounced adjacency effect in sunlit > scenes. I have 35mm pictures that are almost unbelievably fine grained. The > negs are sort of erie and beautiful without the halation backing. > > AZ > Maker of Lookaround panoramic camera. > > www.geocities.com/soho/gallery/8874/ > or > keyword.com lookaround > > _______________________________________________ > Cameramakers mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://rmp.opusis.com/mailman/listinfo/cameramakers _______________________________________________ Cameramakers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://rmp.opusis.com/mailman/listinfo/cameramakers
