surely old pac lab is still processing old tri-x? as for the difference in the ASA ratng: that would be because B&W film is more sensitive to the blue part of the spectrum; expose it under tungsten light, and you've effectively reduced the sensitivity of your film, all other things being equal; to compensate for this you're asked to rate your film at 160 instead of 200, which would then compel you to open up your aperture about 1/3 of a stop.
regards s On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:04 PM, ev petrol <epetr...@yahoo.com> wrote: > hey folks! > > where are you using for your 16mm reversal these days? > got the address for yale from colorlab; kodak suggested somewhere in > plattsburgh (?) > > exposed some tri-x at 200ASA (instead of the recommended 160ASA) under a > halogen tungsten light ... thinking it'll probably be ok (?) > why the difference in recommended exposures btw, anyone have an idea? > (since there's no added filter suggested for tungsten ... I think?) > > cheers Moira > > moiratierney.net > vimeo.com/moiratierney > > > _______________________________________________ > FrameWorks mailing list > FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com > https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks > >
_______________________________________________ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
