View Single Post
  #7  
Old June 2nd 04, 01:08 PM
Tzortzakakis Dimitrios
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Kodak Tri-x or Fuji Nepan 400?

Never ever seen or used one.Usually bulk FP4 or sometimes Delta 400.

--
Dimitris Tzortzakakis,Iraklion Crete,Greece
Analogue technology rules-digital sucks
http://www.patriko-kreta.com
dimtzort AT otenet DOT gr the return adress is corrupted
Warning:all offending messages will be deleted, and the offender/spammer
will be put on my personal "black list".
? "Michael Scarpitti" ?????? ??? ??????
om...
whitewave wrote in message

. ..
Hello,
I like tri-x, I found it very easy to use, it allows push/pull
treatments, the grain can be choosen depending on developer, with
D76/ID1 it has quite fine grain and good acutance and it has good
scale of grey.

But I think it has not so much details (especially in midtones) as I
would like to see, it has less sharpens than I want, and its curve
seems to be a bit, onlt a bit, flat.

Should I change it with Fuji Neopan 400? Could it be the film I'm
looking for general purposes BW photos?

I've read it has much more details, finer grain and a deeper curve
on low-midtones. Is it right?

After reading that, I'm very interested in testing it, and it seems
my "perfect" film. But I have to order it online because local shops
doesn't have it (I live in a small town in the centre of Italy), so
before buying I would like to receive comments on my post.

Thanks a lot.

.....................................
Marco Baldovin
www.whitewave.it



I have been using a lot of this film lately, and it seems to be very
good at just about everything. I like it better than Tri-X, HP5 Plus,
or Agfapan 400.