Faster Film, film with better reciprocity, development choice, and pre-exposure could help. TMY-2 with a Xtol 1+1 gives me a true EI of 500, for example.
Faster Film, film with better reciprocity, development choice, and pre-exposure could help. TMY-2 with a Xtol 1+1 gives me a true EI of 500, for example.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
Peter I think you recommended Acros 100. I have some more TMY-2 on order from BandH but as soon as I receive it I think I am going to send it back for some Acros. I need to read up on how well Acros works with Rodinal 1:200.
TMY-2 and Acros100 are essentially equal in speed/reciprocity, give or take how you choose to expose, even though TMY-2 needs an immediate 1/2 speed correction after 1 second, it's also 2 speeds faster to begin with, so essentially it's technically faster at first than Acros100, but then it catches up later.Originally Posted by RodinalDuchamp
Both are excellent but I do prefer Acros100 for long exposures, but that's a personal choice and look preference.
Stone I usually rate TMY-2 @ 100. My exposure assistant app however shows Across as being MUCH faster at 240 seconds for metered exposure. 5:39 for Acros after corrections, 17:54 for TMY-2 but Howard Bond's tests state only about 480seconds 9 minutes.
I was skeptical as you k ow of TMY-2 as we've discussed in another thread but now after using it I am happy I went with it. With stand development and 1:200 rodinal I can really control the highlights in a way that I didn't know I could. Though this probably just the developer doing what it's meant to do TMY-2 has a beautiful tonality that allows for good separation in those halo-like highlights. I have seen some really nice Acros stuff online but not in person so I'll have to try it and see what happens. I dont want to become too attached to TMY-2 as it was hard enough to break away from just shooting Tri-x.
TMY-2 at 100? Wow! Ok, hey everyone has a method, I like that Acros100 seems to rate perfectly at 100, TMY-2 can be done at 400 or 320 for me, just depends. But Acros100.
Yes I'm a big puller. It just WORKS with rodinal... Lol would be funny to see a boom in this rating. My secret sauce.
I'd recommend not blindly using the 'hyperfocal' technique in view camera (or any) photography.
For more in depth reasoning why, check this PDF. To get right to the point, compare pages 23 with 30. http://www.trenholm.org/hmmerk/TIAOOFe.pdf
In my own 'landscape' work, trees and stuff in the distance are rendered very small on the resulting print. I want these things to have great clarity to aid in recognition (ie so they are not blobs). As objects get closer to the camera, they are bigger and can therefore tolerate progressively greater degrees of blurryness without affecting the viewer's comprehension of the subject matter. It so happens that infinity focus satisfies the above conditions.
I have been experimenting with several techniques and infinity focus combined with stopping down further to about f32 has provided very pleasant results for what I am trying to achieve.
My target print size is 16x20. When I print we shall see if diffraction is causing some issues at this aperture.
F/32 shouldn't be a problem diffraction wise at that enlargement size.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
Great. I would try to go larger but I dont have the facilities.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks