Hi, Clint wrote:
> Shel the reason I might not continue to use XP-2 is the contrast does not > look right. I dont know if the kodak brand film would be better, alot of the > blame might be on me for not using filters. Just a thought the whole folder > is located here: Who did your scans, Clint? At least one of them is back to front. Despite its processing drawbacks, I rather like XP-2 for its smoothness of tone. Makes me think of some older large format pictures - I had a small discussion about this phenomenon with Tom a while back. Because of this quality, I'm not sure it is a suitable film for the documentation you are creating, which is a thoroughly worthwhile exercise. Might be worth trying a film with higher acutance (~edge sharpness) to see if the output is more acceptable to you. Of course, once you get into traditional B&W, you will have to either do your own processing or spend some time finding a body who will process the way you want. mike
