If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Chris Loffredo wrote in message ...
Ask if you want to know more... Thanks for the comments and confirming my suspicions. I looked at the negatives, and it's possible they are not as bad as the prints would indicate, so perhaps the bigger problem was the printing rather than the processing. I am not particularly interested in futzing about with chemicals, even though everyone keeps saying how easy and cheap it is. But just in case (and for the benefit of the untold millions of Usenet lurkers reading this thread), where is the best overview of what's involved? Cost, equipment and materials, space requirements, etc? And it still leaves printing, right? I have had more problems with crappy printing than with crappy processing. Is printing difficult and expensive? Thanks again. *UncaMikey |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
"UncaMikey" wrote in message om... I haven't shot B&W in decades, so I bought some Fortepan from B&H, just to play around. I shot a roll of 100 using my Pentax *ist and various lenses. I had the film processed at Sam's Club, the off-site service that takes 2 weeks, since it was so cheap and I was simply curious as to what I would get. I was not expecting much, but even so I was disappointed. The film seems to have extraordinarily limited range -- single photos had both blown white highlights and pitch black shadows, not much gray tones. Besides the extreme contrast, some images seemed blurred and indistinct. The shots were in a wide variety of situations, indoor and outdoor, low light and full sunlight, etc. I don't think it was the camera, since all the other rolls I've shot with the Pentax *ist have come out remarkably well; the camera seems to have quite accurate and sophisticated metering and focusing systems. There is a slight chance it was the lab, but I know very little about the mechanics and chemistry of photo processing. Are the poor results likely the result of using poor film, as I suspect, or was it partially the cheap processing? Or was it operator error, a lazy amateur accustomed to today's high quality color films? Larf! I still have a roll of Fortepan 400 but I wonder whether it's even worth the trouble to use. What sort of results have others had with this film? Do I need to stick to reputable brand films? Thanks for suggestions and comments. *UncaMikey I've used Fortepan a couple of times. That was enough. Nuff said. Of course, developing yourself is the only way to go, but overexposing the CN B/W films comes out well too sometimes, if you find a good printer, which is the real problem. Bob Hickey |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
"UncaMikey" wrote in message om... I haven't shot B&W in decades, so I bought some Fortepan from B&H, just to play around. I shot a roll of 100 using my Pentax *ist and various lenses. I had the film processed at Sam's Club, the off-site service that takes 2 weeks, since it was so cheap and I was simply curious as to what I would get. I was not expecting much, but even so I was disappointed. The film seems to have extraordinarily limited range -- single photos had both blown white highlights and pitch black shadows, not much gray tones. Besides the extreme contrast, some images seemed blurred and indistinct. The shots were in a wide variety of situations, indoor and outdoor, low light and full sunlight, etc. I don't think it was the camera, since all the other rolls I've shot with the Pentax *ist have come out remarkably well; the camera seems to have quite accurate and sophisticated metering and focusing systems. There is a slight chance it was the lab, but I know very little about the mechanics and chemistry of photo processing. Are the poor results likely the result of using poor film, as I suspect, or was it partially the cheap processing? Or was it operator error, a lazy amateur accustomed to today's high quality color films? Larf! I still have a roll of Fortepan 400 but I wonder whether it's even worth the trouble to use. What sort of results have others had with this film? Do I need to stick to reputable brand films? Thanks for suggestions and comments. *UncaMikey I've used Fortepan a couple of times. That was enough. Nuff said. Of course, developing yourself is the only way to go, but overexposing the CN B/W films comes out well too sometimes, if you find a good printer, which is the real problem. Bob Hickey |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
"UncaMikey" wrote in message om... I haven't shot B&W in decades, so I bought some Fortepan from B&H, just to play around. I shot a roll of 100 using my Pentax *ist and various lenses. I had the film processed at Sam's Club, the off-site service that takes 2 weeks, since it was so cheap and I was simply curious as to what I would get. I was not expecting much, but even so I was disappointed. The film seems to have extraordinarily limited range -- single photos had both blown white highlights and pitch black shadows, not much gray tones. Besides the extreme contrast, some images seemed blurred and indistinct. The shots were in a wide variety of situations, indoor and outdoor, low light and full sunlight, etc. I don't think it was the camera, since all the other rolls I've shot with the Pentax *ist have come out remarkably well; the camera seems to have quite accurate and sophisticated metering and focusing systems. There is a slight chance it was the lab, but I know very little about the mechanics and chemistry of photo processing. Are the poor results likely the result of using poor film, as I suspect, or was it partially the cheap processing? Or was it operator error, a lazy amateur accustomed to today's high quality color films? Larf! I still have a roll of Fortepan 400 but I wonder whether it's even worth the trouble to use. What sort of results have others had with this film? Do I need to stick to reputable brand films? Thanks for suggestions and comments. *UncaMikey I've used Fortepan a couple of times. That was enough. Nuff said. Of course, developing yourself is the only way to go, but overexposing the CN B/W films comes out well too sometimes, if you find a good printer, which is the real problem. Bob Hickey |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
"UncaMikey" wrote in message om... Chris Loffredo wrote in message ... Ask if you want to know more... Thanks for the comments and confirming my suspicions. I looked at the negatives, and it's possible they are not as bad as the prints would indicate, so perhaps the bigger problem was the printing rather than the processing. I am not particularly interested in futzing about with chemicals, even though everyone keeps saying how easy and cheap it is. But just in case (and for the benefit of the untold millions of Usenet lurkers reading this thread), where is the best overview of what's involved? Cost, equipment and materials, space requirements, etc? And it still leaves printing, right? I have had more problems with crappy printing than with crappy processing. Is printing difficult and expensive? Thanks again. Film developing-- equipment needed includes a daylight film developing tank, a thermometer, some sort of timer, measuring containers, film developer, stop bath (optional, a water rinse is acceptable), fixer, wetting agent, and enough dark (closet, changing bag) to load the tank. Printing-- larger amount of dark, 3 or 4 trays larger than the largest size print, tongs, enlarger, easel (a few say an easel is optional), safelight, print developer, stop bath (optional...), fixer. Equipment could cost $250 to $400 (or a lot more), developing a roll of film may cost $1, an 8x10 print around $0.60 each. Over the years, my B&W darkroom probably cost $600, including two enlargers, several film tanks, and a pile of trays. My color darkroom probably cost about $4000, including an automatic printer and roller transport processor, most stuff bought used or as part of a "package". Darkroom is not expensive or difficult; it's fun and addictive. Ken Hart |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Chris Loffredo wrote:
Ralf R. Radermacher wrote: UncaMikey wrote: I haven't shot B&W in decades, so I bought some Fortepan from B&H, just to play around. I shot a roll of 100 using my Pentax *ist and various lenses. I had the film processed at Sam's Club, the off-site service that takes 2 weeks, since it was so cheap and I was simply curious as to what I would get. You've had cheap film processed by a cheap lab. Ralf I'd put more emphasis on the cheap lab. B&W MUST be processed by one's self (or else use an EXCELLENT lab) for decent results: Developing is easy to learn and doesn't require much eqipment. Ask if you want to know more... Others summed up the necessary equipment quite nicely. I'd like to make it even more simple: For negatives you don'tr even need a totally light-tight area - just about any bathroom at night (with a towel over the window if needed) should be enough. Developing tanks and even the chemicals can be found VERY cheaply in online auctions. Since printing B&W is much more complicated & expensive, you might consider going "hybred" and get a film scanner. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Chris Loffredo wrote:
Ralf R. Radermacher wrote: UncaMikey wrote: I haven't shot B&W in decades, so I bought some Fortepan from B&H, just to play around. I shot a roll of 100 using my Pentax *ist and various lenses. I had the film processed at Sam's Club, the off-site service that takes 2 weeks, since it was so cheap and I was simply curious as to what I would get. You've had cheap film processed by a cheap lab. Ralf I'd put more emphasis on the cheap lab. B&W MUST be processed by one's self (or else use an EXCELLENT lab) for decent results: Developing is easy to learn and doesn't require much eqipment. Ask if you want to know more... Others summed up the necessary equipment quite nicely. I'd like to make it even more simple: For negatives you don'tr even need a totally light-tight area - just about any bathroom at night (with a towel over the window if needed) should be enough. Developing tanks and even the chemicals can be found VERY cheaply in online auctions. Since printing B&W is much more complicated & expensive, you might consider going "hybred" and get a film scanner. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Fortepan -- disappointing results | UncaMikey | 35mm Photo Equipment | 37 | December 13th 04 02:50 PM |
Push FortePan 400 | [email protected] | 35mm Photo Equipment | 5 | October 18th 04 04:31 PM |
Best Printing results: Kodak/Fuji Labs and Paper | Pingoleon | Film & Labs | 2 | August 15th 04 06:52 AM |
Fortepan 400 in D76 1+1 | Frank Pittel | In The Darkroom | 1 | June 28th 04 02:00 AM |
OFFICIAL RESULTS: rec.photo.digital.moderated poll | Lionel | 35mm Photo Equipment | 17 | June 25th 04 08:47 PM |