[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [APML] 400F (was: Alternative Anti-Vignetting Photoshop Technique)
> Is 400F the best slide film for galaxies currently available? Sorry, I
> haven't been following this thread from the beginning.
>
> Ulrich
Hi Ulrich.
The "Provia 400F for galaxies" comment you're recalling was most probably
made by me. I've been shooting it since February of last year, and find it
to be the best overall UNHYPERED color film for galaxies I've yet tried.
It's unhypered blue response is much better than E200. BTW --- I have also
used E200 with success on galaxies, but overall the color balance of 400F is
much better than E200, IMO. Provia 400F also shines for objects other than
galaxies as both Jon Kolb and Matt BenDaniel have shown recently, and it's
super fine grain stablemate, 100F, is THE BEST color film to shoot the
smaller, very high surface brightness planetary nebula.
Some 400F galaxies:
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/jeboud/m51.htm
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/jeboud/m82.htm
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/jeboud/m87.htm
Some E200 galaxies:
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/jeboud/m65_m66.htm
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/jeboud/m81.htm
I should note that the blues in the E200 shots were stretched quite a lot in
Photoshop. And what may seem like inconsistent exposure times are mostly due
to nasty New England clouds sneaking up on me at times <g>.
While I'm on the subject, having read other's comments and questions on 400F
today, I should add that:
1. The 400F doesn't have the red sensitivity of E200, but IMO E200 is *too*
sensitive to reds, compared to it's response to other colors. Of course, for
the faintest red nebula, this is a plus for E200. But for many subjects, I
think the color balance of 400F is much better than E200. Matt's recent M42
is an outstanding example:
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/mbendaniel1/gallery/astro/sword.html
2. 400F has much finer grain than any 400 class color negative film I can
think of, but is not quite as fine grained as E200, but reasonably close.
3. I tend to agree with Marco's statement that 400F acts a bit slower than
ISO 400 in practice. Some local pro photographers have mentioned to me that
they think this is so also. But they still love it :o)
4. I have hypered a roll for 2 hrs, 50 degrees C at +3 psi (hand pump
vacuum). Unfortunately the skies didn't cooperate that night as haze and
later fog showed up, but what I *can* say is that there was no strong color
shift, but blues may have been hurt somewhat, reds appeared _very_ slightly
stronger. The overall differences were slight, and this really needs more
testing. I think a very short hyper of an hour or even a bit less may help
just might be a good thing for overall sensitivity. But with this film's
fine unhypered reciprocity characteristics, I'll probably stick to using it
unhypered. I have not pushed it, but I have seen a NGC 7000 shot from
another APML member that was pushed 2 or 3x that looked pretty good.
5. Even though I have applauded 400F's blue response, It's certainly no
hypered RG200 in that regard. But I think it's the best overall unhypered
astro film, however E200 may still be preferred by some for the very
faintest red subjects.
John Boudreau
jeboud@mediaone.net
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/jeboud/astro.htm
----- Original Message -----
From: Ulrich Beinert <analemma@gmx.de>
To: <astro-photo@seds.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 12:54 PM
Subject: AW: [APML] 400F (was: Alternative Anti-Vignetting Photoshop
Technique)
> Is 400F the best slide film for galaxies currently available? Sorry, I
> haven't been following this thread from the beginning.
>
> Ulrich
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: owner-astro-photo@seds.org [mailto:owner-astro-photo@seds.org]Im
> Auftrag von Herm
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 8. Januar 2002 18:50
> An: astro-photo@seds.org
> Betreff: Re: [APML] 400F (was: Alternative Anti-Vignetting Photoshop
> Technique)
>
>
> Matt, I dont like using E200 for galaxy shots, it just does not work
well..
> on
> the other hand its excellent for red stuff..
>
> Matt BenDaniel <matt@starmatt.com> wrote:
>
> >I think E200 is good for subjects that don't
> >have a lot of red in them, like reflection nebulae and galaxies. E200
> >is good for recording faint red nebulosity and for short exposures of
> >red nebulae
>
> Herm
> Astropics http://home.att.net/~hermperez
>
> -- 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>
>
-- APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/> ---
Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>