RE: [APML] Films responding to Ha, Hb, OIII

["Richard Klappal" <klappal@xnet.com>]

In his context, regarding star trails, I think 'a bust' translates as
'unsatisfactory'.

-----Original Message-----
From: astro-photo-bounces@seds.org
[mailto:astro-photo-bounces@seds.org]On Behalf Of Ray Butler
Sent: Wednesday, 13 October, 2004 10:08
To: Discussion of Film Astrophotography
Subject: Re: [APML] Films responding to Ha, Hb, OIII



Stuart,

> Ray, this is very interesting to me. I recently bought 3 rolls of Kodak
Chromogenic film - I was
> really pleased with how it performed in daylight and the C41 processing
was a big bonus (I have put
> away my darkroom toys a long time ago). I tried it for star trails and it
was a bust.

Sorry: in American slang, does "a bust" mean a good or a bad result? I'm
wondering, since "Hollywood, or bust" means "failure" whereas the
similar term "having a blast" means "absolutely great"! It's not a term
which has crossed the pond yet...

 > How sure are you that it will work for long exposure?

I based this on Michael Covington's
http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/astro/updates.html
and
http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/astro/films.html
- which was "Revised 2003 October 24", so it should still be applicable;
and on Patrick Freeman's
http://www.geocities.com/freeman_patrick/astro_film_tests.html
- whose conclusions (on the chromogenic films) I don't at all agree
with. What he calls "saturated" I call "actually picking up lots of
light and having the lowest reciprocity failure" ! To me, T400CN clearly
comes out best of the lot (and somewhat better than the identical
pairing of Portra B&W/Select B&W+), although to him it was the worst.
And he reckons the XP2 Super was best, whereas to me it is clearly the
least sensitive. So we take polar opposite views, based on these images.
Anyone else care to comment?


	... trimmed ...

_______________________________________________
Astro-Photo mailing list
Astro-Photo@seds.org
http://seds.org/mailman/listinfo/astro-photo