Re: [APML] Film E200 vs PJ400?

["Bobby Middleton" <bobm@koyote.com>]

Blair, those 4 reasons are why I use the PJ 400. So your reasoning is 
correct. I hyper the PJ400 but I need it hypered because I like to shoot
galaxies and they just record with better color balance with hypered 
film. But if you are doing most common brighter nebulas, unhypered will
be OK. 

> I've been using E200 Kodak slide film because it was highly
> recommended here, and am pleased with it. I was thinking of
> switching to PJ400 Kodak color negative film for the following
> reasons:
> 
> 1) I scan everything with my Photosmart S20. The S20 does
> a better job scanning night scenes on film than slides.
> 
> 2) The negatives have a greater latitude and exposure forgiveness
> than slides.
> 
> 3) I can get local 1 hr developing on PJ400, slides take several days.
> 
> 4) I can hyper the PJ400, (E200 doesn't need it).
> 
> So, is my reasoning correct? Should I switch to PJ400 (or do
> you suggest a better film)? Should I hyper the PJ400? What's
> the recommended hypering technique? I have the Lumicon kit
> with the Lumicon hand vacuum pump.
> 
> Sincerely
> Blair Batty,
> Simcoe.ON.CA
> 
> 
> 
> --  APML Archives at <http://www.system.missouri.edu/apml/>  ---
>                 Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>


--  APML Archives at <http://www.system.missouri.edu/apml/>  ---
                Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>