Re: [APML] Best 120 color film?

["tan@home.com" <tan@home.com>]

Rick,

	Thanks for the link to your site. Your images show well what one can get 
with Fuji NPH and Kodak E200. I agree that E200's contrast can be an 
advantage sometimes. Often times though I have found this film to be too 
contrasty for me. The brighter regions of red nebulosity tend to all 
"clump together" and with a lack of tonal gradations. Its almost like 
the the "saturation" level has been pushed way up. Also for some reason, 
my shots with this film seem to lack sensitivity to very faint 
nebulosity, even red ones. I have also found that pushing the processing 
of E200 by 1 stop helps quite a bit. There seems to be little loss in 
grain increase when this is done.


Loke


Rick Thurmond wrote:

> Loke,
> I had been using Fuji NPH 400 and Kodak Supra or Ultra paper with good 
> results, then when I couldn't get enough contrast on the Veil nebula 
> with it switched to E200 and Ilfochrome paper.  I got a big improvement 
> in contrast, people say "wow" when they see the veil.
> 
> I haven't verified this yet, but it seems that the short dynamic range 
> and especially the compression at both ends might be an advantage.  It 
> means that any exposure above the background will be in the linear range 
> of the film (the background being below the toe) and any really bright 
> areas will be compressed by the knee.  I have a picture of M42 that I 
> will make a unsharp mask for to see if there is still information in the 
> highly exposed areas.
> 
> But then, that's from my view from the non-digital darkroom.
> 
> http://www.saber.net/~thurmond/astrophoto.html shows my NPH and E200 
> pictures.  These are scans of the prints.
> 
> --Rick
> 
> 
> --  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
>             Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>
> 



--  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
             Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>