Neopan400 in Rodinal 1:100?

"Michael Scarpitti" wrote in message
om...

Japanese lenses give a different look, and the quality differential
between the Focotar-2 that I use and anything else is simply amazing.

Can you show us an example? I found the Focotars to be soft.

BertS wrote in message ink.net...
Kokon wrote:

A Concerned Contributer wrote:

Why don't you shut up and let them ask the question.

The Massive development chart says rated at 200 ISO
the time for 1+100 is 15 minutes 68F....it beats the hell
out of listening to your whining.
http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html


Thx, I know the times, I'm rather interested in users' impressions:-) From
my experiences, Ilfordpan400 developed in R09 has comparable grain size to
Neopan400 in Microphen 1:1, but the tones and grain pattern are much better.
It is also sharper. I also liked TMY in D-23, but now I have some Neopans to
shoot;-)



In general the grain of film developed in Rodinal will be larger than most
other developers. It is not a fine grain developer. But it has a tone quality
to it that many people like. If you liked stuff developed in D23, don't expect
Rodinal to produce similar negatives.

Personally I love what I get from medium speed films (= 400 EI) in Rodinal.
Your taste may differ but you may be very pleasantly surprised.

If you prefer smaller grain, you may want to try making up the Rodinal in a 9%
sulfite solution. Some of the tone/sharpness qualities may be lost but it is a
worthwhile combination. Also, Rodinal at high dilutions (1:100) becomes a nice
compansating developer. Since you will be testing yours film speed anyway, try
it. It is my preferred dilution. Look up the Massive Development Chart for
starting times and film speeds.

Do let us know what your results are.

And I will join the group recommending you ignore M. Scarpitti. I am sure you
will notice he has a pronounced bias against some subjects and against
mainstream opinions. He used to call himself "the world's best printer" until
he posted some of his pix and got laughed at for the junk he showed.

Bert

Bert, you know nothing whatsoever about me, my work, or my knowledge
of photography.

The 'junk' I showed was scanned from books, prints I did not even
make, or prints that were poorly printed!

BertS wrote in message ink.net...
Kokon wrote:

A Concerned Contributer wrote:

Why don't you shut up and let them ask the question.

The Massive development chart says rated at 200 ISO
the time for 1+100 is 15 minutes 68F....it beats the hell
out of listening to your whining.
http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html


Thx, I know the times, I'm rather interested in users' impressions:-) From
my experiences, Ilfordpan400 developed in R09 has comparable grain size to
Neopan400 in Microphen 1:1, but the tones and grain pattern are much better.
It is also sharper. I also liked TMY in D-23, but now I have some Neopans to
shoot;-)



In general the grain of film developed in Rodinal will be larger than most
other developers. It is not a fine grain developer. But it has a tone quality
to it that many people like. If you liked stuff developed in D23, don't expect
Rodinal to produce similar negatives.

Personally I love what I get from medium speed films (= 400 EI) in Rodinal.
Your taste may differ but you may be very pleasantly surprised.

If you prefer smaller grain, you may want to try making up the Rodinal in a 9%
sulfite solution. Some of the tone/sharpness qualities may be lost but it is a
worthwhile combination. Also, Rodinal at high dilutions (1:100) becomes a nice
compansating developer. Since you will be testing yours film speed anyway, try
it. It is my preferred dilution. Look up the Massive Development Chart for
starting times and film speeds.

Do let us know what your results are.

And I will join the group recommending you ignore M. Scarpitti. I am sure you
will notice he has a pronounced bias against some subjects and against
mainstream opinions. He used to call himself "the world's best printer" until
he posted some of his pix and got laughed at for the junk he showed.

Bert

Bert, you know nothing whatsoever about me, my work, or my knowledge
of photography.

The 'junk' I showed was scanned from books, prints I did not even
make, or prints that were poorly printed!

BertS wrote in message ink.net...
Kokon wrote:

I have available scans of a Leica Fotografie article that compares
various film and developer combinations. Rodinal offers the lowest
resolution on several high-speed films tested.

If anyone wants to see the article, please write to me directly. I
have made pdf's from them.

BertS wrote in message ink.net...
Kokon wrote:

I have available scans of a Leica Fotografie article that compares
various film and developer combinations. Rodinal offers the lowest
resolution on several high-speed films tested.

If anyone wants to see the article, please write to me directly. I
have made pdf's from them.

Michael Scarpitti wrote:
: BertS wrote in message ink.net...
: Kokon wrote:
:
: A Concerned Contributer wrote:
:
: Why don't you shut up and let them ask the question.
:
: The Massive development chart says rated at 200 ISO
: the time for 1+100 is 15 minutes 68F....it beats the hell
: out of listening to your whining.
: http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html
:
:
: Thx, I know the times, I'm rather interested in users' impressions:-) From
: my experiences, Ilfordpan400 developed in R09 has comparable grain size to
: Neopan400 in Microphen 1:1, but the tones and grain pattern are much better.
: It is also sharper. I also liked TMY in D-23, but now I have some Neopans to
: shoot;-)
:
:
:
: In general the grain of film developed in Rodinal will be larger than most
: other developers. It is not a fine grain developer. But it has a tone quality
: to it that many people like. If you liked stuff developed in D23, don't expect
: Rodinal to produce similar negatives.
:
: Personally I love what I get from medium speed films (= 400 EI) in Rodinal.
: Your taste may differ but you may be very pleasantly surprised.
:
: If you prefer smaller grain, you may want to try making up the Rodinal in a 9%
: sulfite solution. Some of the tone/sharpness qualities may be lost but it is a
: worthwhile combination. Also, Rodinal at high dilutions (1:100) becomes a nice
: compansating developer. Since you will be testing yours film speed anyway, try
: it. It is my preferred dilution. Look up the Massive Development Chart for
: starting times and film speeds.
:
: Do let us know what your results are.
:
: And I will join the group recommending you ignore M. Scarpitti. I am sure you
: will notice he has a pronounced bias against some subjects and against
: mainstream opinions. He used to call himself "the world's best printer" until
: he posted some of his pix and got laughed at for the junk he showed.
:
: Bert

: Bert, you know nothing whatsoever about me, my work, or my knowledge
: of photography.

: The 'junk' I showed was scanned from books, prints I did not even
: make, or prints that were poorly printed!

Are you now publically admitting that you violated the copyright of the owner of
the work and claimed the work as your own?? What books did you steal the images
from??

Personally I think this is another one of your lies. When you first posted them
you bragged about them. When people started to laugh at the **** poor quality of
the images you claimed they were crap prints that you made during the early
70's and are no longer reflective of your current abilities. You mantained that
until a couple of days ago. Now you decided to claim that they weren't prints
you made all along and that in reality you stole them.

Not only are you a **** poor photographer. You are a liar and a thief. Is it any
wonder you have no credibility left.
--




Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
-------------------

Michael Scarpitti wrote:
: BertS wrote in message ink.net...
: Kokon wrote:
:
: A Concerned Contributer wrote:
:
: Why don't you shut up and let them ask the question.
:
: The Massive development chart says rated at 200 ISO
: the time for 1+100 is 15 minutes 68F....it beats the hell
: out of listening to your whining.
: http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html
:
:
: Thx, I know the times, I'm rather interested in users' impressions:-) From
: my experiences, Ilfordpan400 developed in R09 has comparable grain size to
: Neopan400 in Microphen 1:1, but the tones and grain pattern are much better.
: It is also sharper. I also liked TMY in D-23, but now I have some Neopans to
: shoot;-)
:
:
:
: In general the grain of film developed in Rodinal will be larger than most
: other developers. It is not a fine grain developer. But it has a tone quality
: to it that many people like. If you liked stuff developed in D23, don't expect
: Rodinal to produce similar negatives.
:
: Personally I love what I get from medium speed films (= 400 EI) in Rodinal.
: Your taste may differ but you may be very pleasantly surprised.
:
: If you prefer smaller grain, you may want to try making up the Rodinal in a 9%
: sulfite solution. Some of the tone/sharpness qualities may be lost but it is a
: worthwhile combination. Also, Rodinal at high dilutions (1:100) becomes a nice
: compansating developer. Since you will be testing yours film speed anyway, try
: it. It is my preferred dilution. Look up the Massive Development Chart for
: starting times and film speeds.
:
: Do let us know what your results are.
:
: And I will join the group recommending you ignore M. Scarpitti. I am sure you
: will notice he has a pronounced bias against some subjects and against
: mainstream opinions. He used to call himself "the world's best printer" until
: he posted some of his pix and got laughed at for the junk he showed.
:
: Bert

: Bert, you know nothing whatsoever about me, my work, or my knowledge
: of photography.

: The 'junk' I showed was scanned from books, prints I did not even
: make, or prints that were poorly printed!

Are you now publically admitting that you violated the copyright of the owner of
the work and claimed the work as your own?? What books did you steal the images
from??

Personally I think this is another one of your lies. When you first posted them
you bragged about them. When people started to laugh at the **** poor quality of
the images you claimed they were crap prints that you made during the early
70's and are no longer reflective of your current abilities. You mantained that
until a couple of days ago. Now you decided to claim that they weren't prints
you made all along and that in reality you stole them.

Not only are you a **** poor photographer. You are a liar and a thief. Is it any
wonder you have no credibility left.
--




Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
-------------------

On 28 Aug 2004 19:26:24 -0700, (Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:

BertS wrote in message ink.net...
Kokon wrote:

I have available scans of a Leica Fotografie article that compares
various film and developer combinations. Rodinal offers the lowest
resolution on several high-speed films tested.

If anyone wants to see the article, please write to me directly. I
have made pdf's from them.

Since these have been E-mailed to me without my having to ask, Here
are my impressions.

Rodinal was used at 1+50 and 1+75 on all films, with, generally, slow
films getting the more dilute version. We have been discussing 1+100
and beyond here and the addition of some Sulfite. The films under
test in the 1968 article. are not available now, with the possible
exeption of Adox, as Efke.

This set of factors reduces the relevance of the tests results to
today's films and this discussion.

Given that, it appears some other developers give poor results with
some films and good results with others. Rodinal is one of these.
Even using the inappropriate (in my opinion) 1+50 dilution, Rodianal
gives results the equal of any number of other developers.

Big surprise is Diafine's abilities to increase effective speed with a
number of films,as well as its image qualities.

An even bigger surprise is the results of using E24 with the Adox
films. Whopping speed increases while maintaining average quality
with other developers.

Hey, what's up with Atomal and Agfa and Perutz films. Lots of speed
and gooos image quality. Back then, this was a variant of the
Promicrol type. containing Glycin and that Amidol-like agent in the
Promicrol patent.

What the nameless one quotes is not anything like proof of his
assertions, even if the datedness is set aside.

Interesting, though.

What's E24?



Robert Vervoordt, MFA

On 28 Aug 2004 19:26:24 -0700, (Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:

BertS wrote in message ink.net...
Kokon wrote:

I have available scans of a Leica Fotografie article that compares
various film and developer combinations. Rodinal offers the lowest
resolution on several high-speed films tested.

If anyone wants to see the article, please write to me directly. I
have made pdf's from them.

Since these have been E-mailed to me without my having to ask, Here
are my impressions.

Rodinal was used at 1+50 and 1+75 on all films, with, generally, slow
films getting the more dilute version. We have been discussing 1+100
and beyond here and the addition of some Sulfite. The films under
test in the 1968 article. are not available now, with the possible
exeption of Adox, as Efke.

This set of factors reduces the relevance of the tests results to
today's films and this discussion.

Given that, it appears some other developers give poor results with
some films and good results with others. Rodinal is one of these.
Even using the inappropriate (in my opinion) 1+50 dilution, Rodianal
gives results the equal of any number of other developers.

Big surprise is Diafine's abilities to increase effective speed with a
number of films,as well as its image qualities.

An even bigger surprise is the results of using E24 with the Adox
films. Whopping speed increases while maintaining average quality
with other developers.

Hey, what's up with Atomal and Agfa and Perutz films. Lots of speed
and gooos image quality. Back then, this was a variant of the
Promicrol type. containing Glycin and that Amidol-like agent in the
Promicrol patent.

What the nameless one quotes is not anything like proof of his
assertions, even if the datedness is set aside.

Interesting, though.

What's E24?



Robert Vervoordt, MFA

Michael Scarpitti wrote:
Bert, you know nothing whatsoever about me, my work, or my knowledge
of photography.
The 'junk' I showed was scanned from books, prints I did not even
make, or prints that were poorly printed!

A little RPD history: Around the summer of 2003, Mike Scarpitti posted a
URL link to some of his prints, most of which were SCANNED from an old
college yearbook. I liked a few of his photos, but most were
Photo I/yearbook filler cliches; coeds tossing a Frisbee on the campus
quad, etc. The quality of the original prints must of have been mediocre;
scanning them from a litho-screened book made them worse.

A few weeks before this, Mike Scarpitti made yet another grandiose
statement; he claimed to be ONE OF THE TEN BEST BLACK-AND-WHITE PRINTERS
IN THE WORLD! And to "prove" it, he actually posted a link to some
astoundingly mediocre work...