Re: [APML]: Best Beginner Film

["John Petrush" <jpetrush@flosc.net>]

Emilio

I can only speak from my own (limited) experience and share my thought
process.  I too pondered what film to use for a while.  I finally decided to
just pick one and go for it and learn from the mistakes - of which I've made
quite a few <g>.  I have the blessing of a fully equipped darkroom in which
I can reliably process film and manipulate the printing process any way I
choose.  This has a lot to do with my own choices.

Slides are excellent for two reasons - the exposure latitude is very narrow,
so even relatively small errors are easy to evaluate.  Second, process E-6
is readily available; either by a lab or at home.  You can process E-6
easily at home without a darkroom.  All you really need is a big changing
bag and a method of controlling the solutions' temperature.  Since there is
no printing process for the automated equipment to "adjust and compensate"
for, the whole set of variables printing introduces is eliminated.

Negative films, and processing, are far more available, but mostly of the
one-hour mini-lab variety.  These labs suit the point-and-shoot market well,
but leave much to be desired for the astro shooter.  The one and only time I
used one, they returned my film - no prints - as "damaged" because they
didn't realize what the exposures were.  In fact, that roll had my first
successful image of the Orion Nebula on it.  Negative film also provides
*much* greater exposure latitude - as long as your exposure is close you can
get a reasonable print.  For the home darkroom printer, it is less expensive
and easier to process prints from negatives than from slides.  Manipulation
of the two is about the same difficulty, just done differently.

Don't count out B&W imaging.  You can use fast B&W film, like T-max (not
recommended except for very early beginning steps) or buy hypered Tech Pan.
For sharpness and detailed resolution, I'm not convinced TP can be beat.
There are some folks doing first class imaging in B&W.

So what did I do?  I choose to standardize on PPF-400 color negative film.
I don't hyper it.  I usually develop it myself; if I use a lab, it is for
process only - no cutting or printing.  By using just one film, all my
printing (including the non-astro photos) is simpler.  Because all my negs
are of the same film type printing filtration variances are reduced.  For
me, it works.

I have considered switching to the new Ektachrome E100SW and printing
Cibachrome prints.  Maybe someday.  Until I learn a *bunch* more, I'll stick
with PPF and spend my $$$ and time on shooting more.

John P

-----Original Message-----
From: Emilio J.Robau, P.E. <ejr@consult-rwa.com>
To: 'astro-photo@nightsky.com' <astro-photo@nightsky.com>
Date: Saturday, February 14, 1998 6:25 PM
Subject: [APML]: Best Beginner Film


>
>I am looking to start astro-photography.  I plan to begin with piggyback
>photography with my OM-1 and Meade 10" LX50.  What is the best film to use.
> I plan to guide my photos and am near dark to medium dark skies.
>
>I am considering Fugi SuperG plus 800.  Is there any difference between the
>Super G 800 and Super G plus 800?  I am also considering Kodak Pro PPF 400.
> Are there any other suggestions?
>
>What should I use for longer direct focus shots.  Say 30 min or more.
>
>Thanks in advance.
>
>