Re: [APML] Fuji NPH400 tests posted

[Grant <GB1029@inter-linc.net>]

John,
Thanks for the info confirming the films nasty sensitivity to light pollution.
I definitely won't be buying any more rolls of it (pretty pricey stuff). 
Let us know
how the hypering works out if you decide to try it.

Hope you enjoyed the Dbl Cluster shots.  Aside from a bit of field rotation 
from
a poor polar alignment, I'm pretty happy with them.
Especially considering the atmosphere was only so so.
I'm just starting to fully understand the variety of processing techniques 
and feel
my results are getting better.

Regards,
Grant

At 07:21 PM 10/19/01 -0400, you wrote:
>Grant, I was just checking Philipp Keller's test of  NHGII 800 vs. two other
>films at:
>http://www.astrooptik.com/Bildergalerie/filmtest/namibiatest_eng.htm
>
>He notes a problem recording light pollution with NHGII 800, and it has
>nearly identical spectral response curves to the NPH 400 that you just
>tested. To quote Philipp from his test:
>"To conclude we think that the Fuji NHGII-800 is very well suitable for the
>very dark sky of  Namibia. From other people, who have tested this film
>under worse conditions it has been noted, that the film seems to behave much
>worse here due to the strong green and yellow response that makes it
>vulnerable to artificial light from Na- or HG lamps."
>
>So it's probably the film recording your local light pollution better than
>other films you tried, shortening your usual exposure time to the sky fog
>limit. It's just showing up your system's vignetting a bit better.


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