A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » General Photography » In The Darkroom
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Geoffrey Crawley`s FX-55 Formula.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 9th 08, 11:05 PM
Keith Tapscott. Keith Tapscott. is offline
Senior Member
 
First recorded activity by PhotoBanter: Feb 2005
Posts: 112
Default Geoffrey Crawley`s FX-55 Formula.

http://web.mac.com/johnfinch/Pictori..._magazine.html
  #2  
Old December 13th 08, 03:40 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Lew
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 31
Default Geoffrey Crawley`s FX-55 Formula.

Neat! Thanks!

Any ideas why this ng has been so inactive lately?

"Keith Tapscott." wrote in message
...

http://tinyurl.com/59pklv




--
Keith Tapscott.


  #3  
Old December 13th 08, 03:53 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Lew
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 31
Default Geoffrey Crawley`s FX-55 Formula.

I'm not familiar with Acros, but I see that it's an iso 100 film, yet you
tested it at 80. Since phenidone developers typically yield an effective
speed increase over the iso m-q standard, I'm wondering if you gave any
thought to testing at iso 100 or above.

"Keith Tapscott." wrote in message
...

http://tinyurl.com/59pklv




--
Keith Tapscott.


  #4  
Old December 13th 08, 09:53 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Richard Knoppow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 751
Default Geoffrey Crawley`s FX-55 Formula.


"Lew" wrote in message
...
Neat! Thanks!

Any ideas why this ng has been so inactive lately?

"Keith Tapscott."
wrote in message
...

http://tinyurl.com/59pklv




--
Keith Tapscott.


Digital photography is the answer. All the rec.photo
newsgroups have fallen off, some have not had posts in a
year. I still read about three but there is activity mainly
in the digital group.
Another reason is the continuing shift of Usenet users
to private mailing lists. This is partly to avoid spam and
partly because many Usenet lists became pretty uncivilized.
Mailing lists are always moderated to some degree where
there are few actively moderated Usenet groups now. Too bad.


--
--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA



  #5  
Old December 13th 08, 10:03 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Richard Knoppow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 751
Default Geoffrey Crawley`s FX-55 Formula.


"Lew" wrote in message
...
I'm not familiar with Acros, but I see that it's an iso
100 film, yet you tested it at 80. Since phenidone
developers typically yield an effective speed increase
over the iso m-q standard, I'm wondering if you gave any
thought to testing at iso 100 or above.

"Keith Tapscott."
wrote in message
...

http://tinyurl.com/59pklv




--
Keith Tapscott.



I am not familiar with Geoffrey Crawley's developers
from a use standpoint but in general I agree with you about
the above. Note that the presense of Phenidone will not
automatically result in a speed increase, it depends on the
rest of the formula. Also note that the _effective_ speed of
a film depends on the contrast to which its developed. The
contrast which is indirectly specified in the ISO standard
for B&W negative still film is about right for printing with
diffusion sources. When negatives are developed for the
somewhat lower contrast required for condenser printing the
speed is typically about 80 percent of the ISO speed.
Developers certainly have some effect on speed but the range
is not great. Using D-76 as a reference developers like
T-Max, T-Max RS, Microphen, DDX, Xtol, etc., deliver about
3/4 stop greater speed for the ISO contrast. Developers like
Microdol-X and Perceptol, when used full strength for their
extra-fine-grain property, deliver about 3/4 stop less
speed. Developers like Rodinal are somewhere in this
bracket, in the case of Rodinal somewhat on the low speed
side of D-76.
Also note that duplicating the ISO measurements is not
trivial. A simple speed test without the controlled exposure
and carefully controlled development of the ISO test may
result in a somewhat different speed. Also, the current
version of the ISO standard no longer specifies a standard
developer, rather any developer can be used provided its
indicated along with the resulting speed. Some
manufacturers, notably Kodak, will indicate effective speed
in their development charts.
Since the ISO standard is intended to indicate the
minimum exposure which results in good tone rendition its
often found that a somewhat greater exposure will give
somewhat better shadow detail.


--
--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA



  #6  
Old December 13th 08, 11:45 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Charles Hohenstein
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12
Default Geoffrey Crawley`s FX-55 Formula.

In article ,
"Richard Knoppow" wrote:

Another reason is the continuing shift of Usenet users
to private mailing lists. This is partly to avoid spam and
partly because many Usenet lists became pretty uncivilized.
Mailing lists are always moderated to some degree where
there are few actively moderated Usenet groups now. Too bad.


I'm glad that you have stuck it out on Usenet, Mr. Knoppow. There are
still people on Usenet who are looking for useful information, and you
have always been a rich source of it.

At the same time, it would be great to see you on APUG also. The level
of activity on that site and the collective knowledge represented by the
members is something marvelous.

In case you are unaware, there is an analogue photography podcast which
is available on iTunes now. So far the emphasis has been on interviews
with professional photographers and why they use film for some or all of
their work, but I'm hoping that there might be some more discussion of
darkroom matters. There was a long interview with Ctein about dye
transfer which I found fascinating. He candidly admitted where he found
digital more useful, but was equally emphatic that for some purposes dye
transfer is unequalled. Having never seen a dye transfer print, I can't
comment intelligently on that.

--
Charles Hohenstein (to reply, remove Gene Robinson)

"The sad huddle of affluent bedwetters, thumbsuckers,
treehuggers, social*climbers, homophiles, quavery ladies,
and chronic petition signers that*makes up the current
Episcopal Church . . ." -‹Thomas Lipscomb
  #7  
Old December 13th 08, 11:53 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Lew
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 31
Default Geoffrey Crawley`s FX-55 Formula.

so it there a list or 2 that you personally favor? I don't mind an off-line
response if security is an issue.

"Richard Knoppow" wrote in message
...

"Lew" wrote in message
...
Neat! Thanks!

Any ideas why this ng has been so inactive lately?

"Keith Tapscott." wrote in
message ...

http://tinyurl.com/59pklv




--
Keith Tapscott.


Digital photography is the answer. All the rec.photo newsgroups have
fallen off, some have not had posts in a year. I still read about three
but there is activity mainly in the digital group.
Another reason is the continuing shift of Usenet users to private
mailing lists. This is partly to avoid spam and partly because many Usenet
lists became pretty uncivilized. Mailing lists are always moderated to
some degree where there are few actively moderated Usenet groups now. Too
bad.


--
--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA



  #8  
Old December 14th 08, 06:32 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Lew
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 31
Default Geoffrey Crawley`s FX-55 Formula.

APUG looks slick, but it's way over automated. Pages nested in pages etc...
more passwords & profiles to remember, plus a fee for some services ... It's
my firm belief that info & ideas should be exchanged freely and with the
ease and simplicity of this ng. I wonder why the former group of posters
didn't opt for a moderated email list. I use freelists.org for another
platform. It's moderated & everyone's pretty happy with it.

"Charles Hohenstein" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Richard Knoppow" wrote:

Another reason is the continuing shift of Usenet users
to private mailing lists. This is partly to avoid spam and
partly because many Usenet lists became pretty uncivilized.
Mailing lists are always moderated to some degree where
there are few actively moderated Usenet groups now. Too bad.


I'm glad that you have stuck it out on Usenet, Mr. Knoppow. There are
still people on Usenet who are looking for useful information, and you
have always been a rich source of it.

At the same time, it would be great to see you on APUG also. The level
of activity on that site and the collective knowledge represented by the
members is something marvelous.

In case you are unaware, there is an analogue photography podcast which
is available on iTunes now. So far the emphasis has been on interviews
with professional photographers and why they use film for some or all of
their work, but I'm hoping that there might be some more discussion of
darkroom matters. There was a long interview with Ctein about dye
transfer which I found fascinating. He candidly admitted where he found
digital more useful, but was equally emphatic that for some purposes dye
transfer is unequalled. Having never seen a dye transfer print, I can't
comment intelligently on that.

--
Charles Hohenstein (to reply, remove Gene Robinson)

"The sad huddle of affluent bedwetters, thumbsuckers,
treehuggers, social climbers, homophiles, quavery ladies,
and chronic petition signers that makes up the current
Episcopal Church . . ." -Thomas Lipscomb


  #9  
Old December 14th 08, 07:13 PM
Keith Tapscott. Keith Tapscott. is offline
Senior Member
 
First recorded activity by PhotoBanter: Feb 2005
Posts: 112
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lew View Post
I'm not familiar with Acros, but I see that it's an iso 100 film, yet you
tested it at 80. Since phenidone developers typically yield an effective
speed increase over the iso m-q standard, I'm wondering if you gave any
thought to testing at iso 100 or above.
Hi Lew,
It`s not my site or test. I only posted the link because I thought that it might be of interest to those who like to experiment with raw chemicals.

There is a new website for those who prefer film and darkroom photography and new members are welcome.
http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.or...orum/index.php

Last edited by Keith Tapscott. : December 14th 08 at 07:21 PM.
  #10  
Old December 14th 08, 11:21 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Richard Knoppow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 751
Default Geoffrey Crawley`s FX-55 Formula.


"Charles Hohenstein"
wrote in message
...
In article
,
"Richard Knoppow" wrote:

Another reason is the continuing shift of Usenet
users
to private mailing lists. This is partly to avoid spam
and
partly because many Usenet lists became pretty
uncivilized.
Mailing lists are always moderated to some degree where
there are few actively moderated Usenet groups now. Too
bad.


I'm glad that you have stuck it out on Usenet, Mr.
Knoppow. There are
still people on Usenet who are looking for useful
information, and you
have always been a rich source of it.

At the same time, it would be great to see you on APUG
also. The level
of activity on that site and the collective knowledge
represented by the
members is something marvelous.

In case you are unaware, there is an analogue photography
podcast which
is available on iTunes now. So far the emphasis has been
on interviews
with professional photographers and why they use film for
some or all of
their work, but I'm hoping that there might be some more
discussion of
darkroom matters. There was a long interview with Ctein
about dye
transfer which I found fascinating. He candidly admitted
where he found
digital more useful, but was equally emphatic that for
some purposes dye
transfer is unequalled. Having never seen a dye transfer
print, I can't
comment intelligently on that.

--
Charles Hohenstein (to reply, remove Gene Robinson)

Thank you very much for the complement:-)
I've seen a fair number of dye transfer prints. They
look very good and seem to hold up fairly well. Dye tranfer
has a long history: the system Kodak sold was actually
bought by them from another company. Kodak had a previous
system called Dye Imbibition, which was similar but the
later version had many improvements. One advantage of DT is
that the images are quite sharp. It was used in the
advertising industry both for proofing and for making
originals to be made into three color printing plates. The
method which preceded Dye Transfer was the three-color
carbon or carbro method. This is an exceedingly fussy and
difficult process although it resulted in beautiful results.
There were a handfull of labs in NYC that specialized in
three-color-carbon to service the advertising business.
Eventually direct photography of large Kodachrome originals
replaced carbon although dye transfer remained a popular
color printing method until computer printing displaced all
photographic methods in the printing trades.
I check into APUG occasionally, but there are now so
many venues for discussion that its hard to keep up with
them. Perhaps I should do it more often, there may be some
old friends there.


--
--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Geoffrey Goddard's first Leicas on auction Frank ess 35mm Photo Equipment 0 August 28th 06 07:55 PM
Gooks, the lean diet rarely moulds Robbie, it kills Geoffrey instead, Moronic Crackhead. Catherine Burr Digital Photography 0 June 4th 06 10:24 AM
Italian Greaseballs, both opening now, Joe and Geoffrey excused the proud summers about quiet sauce, Moronic Cowboy. Lionel Digital Photography 0 May 2nd 06 03:16 AM
we promise them, then we weakly converse Geoffrey and Franklin's weak bush [email protected] Digital Photography 0 April 22nd 06 03:07 PM
[SI] Bored Sick Transvestite Will you promise alongside the sunshine, if Geoffrey quietly orders the fig? [email protected] 35mm Photo Equipment 0 April 10th 06 08:38 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.