[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: [APML] Agfacolor Optima II 400



Hi Don:
As you suspected, my shot was made with unhypered film. I'm sure that with hypering I would have gotten more extended nebulosity. I suspect that this film is not worth a lot more work. I'm still intrigued by Konica Centuria 800, but I've only used it for one target (M31) so far. Overall, I've had the most consistent results with E200, Supra 400, and LE 400, all unhypered. Haven't had time to give RG 200 (or any others) a fair trial.
Bert
 
Bert Katzung
katzung1@attbi.com
www.astronomy-images.com
 
----- Original Message -----
From: westergren
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: [APML] Agfacolor Optima II 400

Thanks Bert,
I know that each color film and film manufacturer uses a mask which requires the scanner to compensate.  Your scans show that the Agfa Optima film gets a picture of M8, at least when processed in Photoshop. 
 
I didn't see whether you used hypered film or not.  I'm curious, because I shot M8 three years ago with hypered Royal Gold 400 at f/9 for 30 minutes and got much more extended nebulosity (on drug store prints) than I see in your 40 minute at f/6.  It may be that the Agfa isn't a great film for astrophotos.
Don