Thanks. Todd On Tuesday, June 17, 2003, at 09:07 AM, sebastien koeppel wrote:
yes I did test the ilford stock, maybe 8 years ago pan F is amazing, FP4 is good and HP5 is the most sensitive filmstock you can find I found it at a standard gamma devt at 800 asa ! (developped at Dejonghe in Belgium ), and it has really acceptable grain the only problem with the HP5 was that it was really grey and I printed it on ST8 (agfa sound film stock) but developed in a standard chemical The FP4 and HP5 were contrasted enough even if I do agree on the problem of the black and white print today... ecological problems !!! I found some black and white 16mm or 8mm shot in late 40's and it's incredible sharp, beautiful contrast and range of greys !!! impossible to find and to do today ! just to finish with ilford film, the main problem is that they really do not care of cinematography ! they just make conditionning on ordering and I had some troubles with the HP5 : it jammed in the cameras ! I think the problem came from perforations... I just give advice to a DOP 3 years ago for a long feature he wanted to shoot on 35mm BW. He was a well known french DOP (Jean-Marie Dreujou) and the film was with Vanessa Paradis but he never get positive answer from Ilford and he finally shot on colour and make inters on BW... I find it crazy just try FUJI BW !!! they have ONE beautiful filmstock on 16 and 35 80 asa on departure, but easy to push ! much more beautiful than kodak seb --- Julian Williamson <julian3rd@earthlink.net> wrote:I really wasn't meaning to be overly pedantic; I'm sure not everyone on the list is equally familiar with how the stocks work. At any rate, color "ghost" grain looks different than B&W grain, and Kodak's current B&W stocks look much grainier than equivalent-speed Vision stocks, whether printed or telecine'd. I think we'd all be delighted if Kodak would make up some T-Max b&w stock in 16mm. I would like to compare it. Has anyone seriously tested the Ilford 16mm B&W stock? julianFrom: Leo Vale <leoavale@yahoo.com> Reply-To: EclairACL@topica.com Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 11:05:08 -0700 (PDT) To: EclairACL@topica.com Subject: Re: Eclair Cameras: T-max versus 7245 --- Julian Williamson <julian3rd@earthlink.net>wrote:I find it doubtful that any b&w emulsion would be less "grainy" than color, primarily because in B&W, the silver halidecrystalsremain in the emulsion, whereas in color the crystals are used toactivate adye (which makes up the image) and the actual silver halide is thenwashedaway in the bleach stage of color processing -- thus, there are no actual "grains" but the remnants of them left in color emulsions.---Yes, but that's being overly pedantic. When those silver grains are bleached out of the emulsion, the blobs of dye left behind take theformof the silver grain that vanished. Maybe the dyewillbleed a little, but that dye blob will look like grain. In a print what we perceive as grain is actuallythespace between the grains. At that point, there'snopractical difference real grain and color ghostgrain.--- LV __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
==^================================================================ This email was sent to: elroro@propagandaindustries.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84xYK.bdbHPA.ZWxyb3Jv Or send an email to: EclairACL-unsubscribe@topica.com TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html ==^================================================================