CatLABS X FILM 80 MKII now available in 8X10 [Archive]

koh303

16-Oct-2022, 07:47

Having continued the production of CatLABS X FILM 80 MKII now into its second round of coating/cutting, we have finally enough material to cut into 8X10 sheets and are happy to present this to the world!

This 8X10 cutting was in fact in the works for earlier this year but was pushed back due the release of our small/medium format roll film CatLABS X FILM 320 Pro (https://www.35mmc.com/13/10/2022/catlabs-releases-new-black-and-white-film-with-unique-emulsion/)

CatLABS X FILM 80 MK II in 4X5 and 8X10 are the most affordable BW negative sheet films available in the US in their respective formats and are on the way to retailers across the country already. For now, it is available here https://www.catlabs.info/product/clxf80ii
Ships next day.

For those who have not heard about this film, here are some specs:
• CatLABS X FILM 80 is a traditional, slow-speed, fine-grain, high silver content film, designed for a wide array of shooting conditions

• Our CatLABS X FILM 80 MKII is an improved formulation of our classic film

• Following in the footsteps of Kodak's famous 'Panatomic-X' (which was used in Polaroid's equally famous Type 55 film), CatLABS X FILM 80 brings back a classic touch with its unique look

• An ideal “daylight” film, offering versatility and unique characteristics not found in any other currently made film on the market today

• Characterized by its very fine grain, moderate contrast and deep tonal range

• Exhibits a wide exposure latitude under various lighting conditions, and extreme flexibility in processing options

• Rate it at 50 ISO when shooting indoors (under studio lighting) for extreme fine-grain, or push it as high as 800 when shooting in low light conditions

• CatLABS X FILM 80 has an IE of 80 ISO

• For convenience, expose as 100 or 80 ISO for similar results

Tin Can

16-Oct-2022, 08:33

Good

I will order this week

Thank you

gypsydog

16-Oct-2022, 09:08

Thanks Omer, glad to hear your film is back!
You are doing some good work!

sharktooth

16-Oct-2022, 10:07

Does Catlabs have any resellers/distributors in Canada? Cross border shipping fees have been a nightmare lately.

paulbarden

16-Oct-2022, 10:32

Where can we find spectral sensitivity and characteristic curve data for the MKII film, please?

koh303

16-Oct-2022, 11:55

Does Catlabs have any resellers/distributors in Canada? Cross border shipping fees have been a nightmare lately.

There are a few, though its not clear if they will carry this right away.
We have special shipping rates to Canada and usually, those are flat, so no matter how many you order, the shipping price remains the same.

koh303

17-Oct-2022, 18:53

Does Catlabs have any resellers/distributors in Canada? Cross border shipping fees have been a nightmare lately.

Films now on the way to our good friends at Downtown camera in Toronto!
Expect them there in a week or so.
BTW - they will also carry the new X FILM 320 Pro in tiny 35mm and 120 formats :)

paulbarden

18-Oct-2022, 07:38

So, I'm going to assume that all requests for technical data on this film are simply going to be ignored, yes?

sharktooth

18-Oct-2022, 08:56

Films now on the way to our good friends at Downtown camera in Toronto!
Expect them there in a week or so.
BTW - they will also carry the new X FILM 320 Pro in tiny 35mm and 120 formats :)

Thanks, I know that place.

Tin Can

18-Oct-2022, 09:21

I will test and compare for myself as I have a few mystery films

I ordered the new Catlab 4X5 and 8X10 5 hours ago, already shipped

So, I'm going to assume that all requests for technical data on this film are simply going to be ignored, yes?

Peter De Smidt

18-Oct-2022, 11:28

It's great to hear about new films!

Andrew O'Neill

18-Oct-2022, 12:40

Oren Grad

18-Oct-2022, 13:00

So, you only accept paypal payments??

It's stated on the website:

Payments:

We accept payment via PayPal, through our website's automatic checkout process
We are also able to accept payment via direct bank transfer, though a small fee might be added

https://www.catlabs.info/about-us

I haven't used the CatLABS checkout. But when I've bought things from other vendors that have used PayPal as a credit card processor, it hasn't been necessary to create a PayPal account to complete the transaction - you should be able to decline the invitation to create an account.

sharktooth

18-Oct-2022, 14:14

So, you only accept paypal payments?? There seems to be an option to pay with my credit card, but then after I've entered all my details, it wants me to make a paypal account. I don't want a paypal account... If that is the case then, I'm out. Hopefully someone up here will carry it, but very doubtful.

You may be better off getting it from Downtown Camera in Toronto. I see they have free shipping for orders over $150. No cross border fees to worry about either, for Canadians. https://downtowncamera.com/

I don't live in Toronto, but I visit there fairly often. Downtown Camera is one of the few places left to get film and processing in Ontario. They've done a good job satisfying that niche market, and they seem to have been successful with it.

Andrew O'Neill

18-Oct-2022, 15:54

It's stated on the website:

Payments:

We accept payment via PayPal, through our website's automatic checkout process
We are also able to accept payment via direct bank transfer, though a small fee might be added

https://www.catlabs.info/about-us

I haven't used the CatLABS checkout. But when I've bought things from other vendors that have used PayPal as a credit card processor, it hasn't been necessary to create a PayPal account to complete the transaction - you should be able to decline the invitation to create an account.

I went through the process and could not see an option to decline.

Oren Grad

18-Oct-2022, 16:02

I went through the process and could not see an option to decline.

OK, sorry to hear that. Hopefully Omer can provide some clarification.

Andrew O'Neill

18-Oct-2022, 16:09

Thanks sharktooth. $58, and then shipping on top isn't too bad. I ordered two boxes of 4x5. Came to $135. I wish they had 8x10...

Andrew O'Neill

18-Oct-2022, 16:10

OK, sorry to hear that. Hopefully Omer can provide some clarification.

That would be nice. I would rather order from Catlabs. After conversion, including shipping, it's a bit cheaper than buying it up here... and there is no 8x10 at the Toronto store.

sharktooth

18-Oct-2022, 16:56

Thanks sharktooth. $58, and then shipping on top isn't too bad. I ordered two boxes of 4x5. Came to $135. I wish they had 8x10...

Catlabs replied earlier in this thread that their shipment to Downtown Camera was on it's way, and would be there in a week or so. I noticed the 4x5 stock that DC had now was the original version, not this new version MKII. You might want to cancel that order and wait till the 8x10 comes in too. If the total is more than $150 you'll also get free shipping.

Duolab123

18-Oct-2022, 19:53

This is great. Sounds like a really nice film. Good to see more options, especially in 8x10.

Andrew O'Neill

18-Oct-2022, 20:12

Catlabs replied earlier in this thread that their shipment to Downtown Camera was on it's way, and would be there in a week or so. I noticed the 4x5 stock that DC had now was the original version, not this new version MKII. You might want to cancel that order and wait till the 8x10 comes in too. If the total is more than $150 you'll also get free shipping.

Eeeek! Now you tell me! I sent them an email asking them if the have the new version in stock, and to cancel my order if they do not...

Tin Can

19-Oct-2022, 03:50

Pay Pal is handy and I use it all the time

Especially when buying if offered on checkout

The seller eats the surcharge and now they offer Pay in 4 with no interest

Useful for me

no cost

paulbarden

19-Oct-2022, 06:17

I will test and compare for myself as I have a few mystery films

I ordered the new Catlab 4X5 and 8X10 5 hours ago, already shipped

That's great, but wouldn't it be nice if the seller offered to share the manufacturer's specs for the film?? Omer has been asked on multiple occasions for this information and said "no". When pressed for the information, he becomes - shall we say - "prickly".

From Brent Woods' review of the new film (available on Freestyle's site):

"What bothers me about this film is there is absolutely no technical information from CatLabs about this film. After receiving my first 4x5 box of film I expected to find a technical information sheet in the box. When in the dark, as I opened the film, I felt a piece of paper that I thought was the technical sheet. However, when the lights were turned on the paper I felt was a sticker with CatLabs logo on it stating to shoot more film. This is certainly cute but not the needed technical information.
The information I was looking for was what is the spectral sensitivity of the film and how to correct for reciprocity failure? Is this a purely a panchromatic film or what is it an orthopanchromatic film. After exposing a sheet of film to a Kodak Q14 color step wedge I have found the film is neither panchromatic nor orthopanchromatic."

and:

"So, what concerns do I have? First and foremost, absolutely no technical information about the film from CatLabs; if serious photographers are to use this film then reciprocity curves and spectral sensitivity are absolutely needed."

I can deal with not having spectral sensitivity information about a film, but absolutely ZERO information about reciprocity characteristics?? That is essential information. I need to know the reciprocity traits for the films I work with, and I'm not going to adopt a new film - no matter how cheap it is - if the seller isn't willing (or able) to supply basic information like reciprocity characteristics. The CatLabs web site includes a point list of traits for the film, but it's all in marketing speak, with absolutely no specifics. Why Omer has decided to intentionally withhold this information is a mystery - unless the data will be deleterious to sales and he's working to obfuscate it.

If you're selling 8x10 format sheet film, you have to acknowledge that you're not selling to a bunch of students who just want to experiment - your customer base is going to be people who work in large format (and many of them have decades of experience) and these people work hard to get the most out of their materials, and to do that you need to know what the characteristics of your materials are.

koh303

19-Oct-2022, 06:18

Andrew O'Neill

19-Oct-2022, 06:23

You can contact us directly via email to make arrangements to pay directly by credit card, no paypal account needed.

Thanks! I may take you up on that. I sent an email to the store in Toronto cancelling my order. Once I get confirmation, I'll be in touch.

Andrew O'Neill

19-Oct-2022, 17:50

Couldn't cancel my order for some strange reason... I really think they "ignored" my request. Oh well... I've got a couple of old stock heading my way. :mad:

John Layton

21-Oct-2022, 04:57

While I've had good experiences with Catlabs generally...I must agree that they should make efforts to supply technical data with this film.

Otherwise, I'd need assurances of absolute (or at least "reasonable") consistency, plus about six "free" sheets to allow for testing to establish my own data.

Tin Can

21-Oct-2022, 05:26

I bought CatII 4X5 for MY testing and 8X10 Cat II for a project

The motto of this forum is

'Test for yourself!'

ic-racer

21-Oct-2022, 05:50

From Brent Woods' review of the new film (available on Freestyle's site):.

Who is Brent Woods? Does he work for Freestyle?
Seems like a useless review because I can figure out there is no datasheet just as easy. A review should test the spectral sensitivity, speed, development characterisitcs and reciprocity, otherwise, useless.

Jim Fitzgerald

21-Oct-2022, 19:07

That's great, but wouldn't it be nice if the seller offered to share the manufacturer's specs for the film?? Omer has been asked on multiple occasions for this information and said "no". When pressed for the information, he becomes - shall we say - "prickly".

From Brent Woods' review of the new film (available on Freestyle's site):

"What bothers me about this film is there is absolutely no technical information from CatLabs about this film. After receiving my first 4x5 box of film I expected to find a technical information sheet in the box. When in the dark, as I opened the film, I felt a piece of paper that I thought was the technical sheet. However, when the lights were turned on the paper I felt was a sticker with CatLabs logo on it stating to shoot more film. This is certainly cute but not the needed technical information.
The information I was looking for was what is the spectral sensitivity of the film and how to correct for reciprocity failure? Is this a purely a panchromatic film or what is it an orthopanchromatic film. After exposing a sheet of film to a Kodak Q14 color step wedge I have found the film is neither panchromatic nor orthopanchromatic."

and:

"So, what concerns do I have? First and foremost, absolutely no technical information about the film from CatLabs; if serious photographers are to use this film then reciprocity curves and spectral sensitivity are absolutely needed."

I can deal with not having spectral sensitivity information about a film, but absolutely ZERO information about reciprocity characteristics?? That is essential information. I need to know the reciprocity traits for the films I work with, and I'm not going to adopt a new film - no matter how cheap it is - if the seller isn't willing (or able) to supply basic information like reciprocity characteristics. The CatLabs web site includes a point list of traits for the film, but it's all in marketing speak, with absolutely no specifics. Why Omer has decided to intentionally withhold this information is a mystery - unless the data will be deleterious to sales and he's working to obfuscate it.

If you're selling 8x10 format sheet film, you have to acknowledge that you're not selling to a bunch of students who just want to experiment - your customer base is going to be people who work in large format (and many of them have decades of experience) and these people work hard to get the most out of their materials, and to do that you need to know what the characteristics of your materials are.

I agree. I'm almost always working in reciprocity territory. How about it? Every film I shoot has this info.

paulbarden

22-Oct-2022, 07:36

I agree. I'm almost always working in reciprocity territory. How about it? Every film I shoot has this info.

Much of what I do also requires knowing the reciprocity factor for the film used. But Catlabs ain't going to give us that info. Omer has made that very clear, on this, and other forums.

Peter De Smidt

22-Oct-2022, 07:47

Isn't it best practice to come up with one's own reciprocity chart?

paulbarden

22-Oct-2022, 08:13

Isn't it best practice to come up with one's own reciprocity chart?

Wouldn't it be ideal to use the manufacturer's data as a starting point?

Peter De Smidt

22-Oct-2022, 09:26

Naw, it's often off by a lot! Honestly, using reciprocity characteristics for a similar film is often just as good of a starting point as manufacturer's suggestions. If the film is all cut from the same stock, then get some roll film and do a few simple tests. Metering method and tools + development + lens characteristics + who knows.....will all have an effect on the results.

Tin Can

22-Oct-2022, 12:26

I also have some films to compare and contrast. Pun

I will not write a review

I will say this, the CatLab outer boxes have no origin printed on the boxes

https://www.catlabs.info/product/clxf80ii

paulbarden

22-Oct-2022, 12:40

Naw, it's often off by a lot!

I have found Ilford reciprocity data to be very reliable and accurate for my needs.

Oren Grad

22-Oct-2022, 13:41

I have found Ilford reciprocity data to be very reliable and accurate for my needs.

Ilford used to show a single generic reciprocity curve in all of their data sheets. Starting around 2017 they issued new information, with an exponential formula and a separate parameter value determined for each film. The resulting curves were very different from those previously published, even though the films had not changed. For example, recommended corrected time for a metered exposure of 30 seconds for FP4 Plus went from just over 150 seconds to just over 70 seconds.

Howard Bond, a careful and methodical worker, had an article in the old Photo Techniques magazine reporting on results of his reciprocity tests of selected Kodak and Ilford films; his reported corrections were different from those provided by the manufacturers.

It's nice when the manufacturer can provide a starting point. But if one's photographic purposes require tight control, there is no alternative to running one's own tests even if only to verify that the manufacturer-provided data are reliable.

John Layton

22-Oct-2022, 14:20

Oren I concur with your points above...that FP4 reciprocity is not nearly as "severe" as earlier charts suggest. Thing is though...with respect to any additional suggested changes to developer times (although Ilford is pretty relaxed about this), is to be very careful about this as reciprocity can also be a great tool for the contrast expansions often needed in otherwise "poor" (like three-stop EV range) lighting conditions. Loads of times in my experience...confronting minimal EV changes as the light was fading - I've reassured myself that "reciprocity (failure) will take care of this."

Oren Grad

22-Oct-2022, 14:56

Thing is though...with respect to any additional suggested changes to developer times (although Ilford is pretty relaxed about this), is to be very careful about this as reciprocity can also be a great tool for the contrast expansions often needed in otherwise "poor" (like three-stop EV range) lighting conditions. Loads of times in my experience...confronting minimal EV changes as the light was fading - I've reassured myself that "reciprocity (failure) will take care of this."

Good point, there are two sides to the reciprocity coin. FWIW, I use a standard development time regardless of SBR or reciprocity. But if one does tailor development to individual exposures, careful consideration of how to optimize for different long-exposure shooting scenarios is certainly a good idea.

Michael R

22-Oct-2022, 16:11

I can reveal that around 2014 (I think) I began correspondence with Ilford regarding their generic curve and basically pestered them into testing and generating proper factors, which were eventually published. Having followed along as the work was done, I can say the revised factors are solid. I wish Kodak would have done the same.

At the time, Howard Bond's data was better than anything in Kodak's or Ilford's documentation, though I was not crazy about certain parts of his methodology (for example that he was using a Zone System framework. I still basically use Bond's adjustments for Kodak films.

Ilford used to show a single generic reciprocity curve in all of their data sheets. Starting around 2017 they issued new information, with an exponential formula and a separate parameter value determined for each film. The resulting curves were very different from those previously published, even though the films had not changed. For example, recommended corrected time for a metered exposure of 30 seconds for FP4 Plus went from just over 150 seconds to just over 70 seconds.

Howard Bond, a careful and methodical worker, had an article in the old Photo Techniques magazine reporting on results of his reciprocity tests of selected Kodak and Ilford films; his reported corrections were different from those provided by the manufacturers.

It's nice when the manufacturer can provide a starting point. But if one's photographic purposes require tight control, there is no alternative to running one's own tests even if only to verify that the manufacturer-provided data are reliable.

paulbarden

22-Oct-2022, 16:23

Ilford used to show a single generic reciprocity curve in all of their data sheets. Starting around 2017 they issued new information, with an exponential formula and a separate parameter value determined for each film.

I wasn't talking about pre-2017 reciprocity data, I meant the current data. Why would I refer to old data??

Andrew O'Neill

22-Oct-2022, 19:39

I agree with Peter. All the manufacturer's data that I have used has been over the top compared to my own... with the exception of Acros. Very accurate data. But, if you cannot generate your own, then the manufacturer's will serve as a starting point. When I get my sweaty mitts on some Catlabs 80, and if I like what I see and continue to use it, then I will go through the PITA steps to make my own data :rolleyes:

Andrew O'Neill

26-Oct-2022, 06:08

Well, my two boxes arrived from Amplis and it says on the box, X Film 80 II... is that the newest version?

paulbarden

26-Oct-2022, 06:13

Well, my two boxes arrived from Amplis and it says on the box, X Film 80 II... is that the newest version?

If it has a “II” after the 80, then yes, it is.

Andrew O'Neill

26-Oct-2022, 06:58

If it has a “II” after the 80, then yes, it is.

It does! Thanks. A quick word about the packaging. I've never seen such flimsy boxes for 4x5 film before. I hope the bag inside containing the film is light tight!

paulbarden

26-Oct-2022, 08:27

It does! Thanks. A quick word about the packaging. I've never seen such flimsy boxes for 4x5 film before. I hope the bag inside containing the film is light tight!

I've read several statements about the flimsy, cheap packaging. To make this film cheap, you gotta cut corners!

Andrew, when you've done a few sheets of this film, I have a specific question for you: can you tell me what the base + fog is for the film? I'm curious if its as clear as FP4 or Delta 100.

Tin Can

26-Oct-2022, 08:31

Thinner cardboard is ecological

No?

Andrew O'Neill

26-Oct-2022, 14:08

I've read several statements about the flimsy, cheap packaging. To make this film cheap, you gotta cut corners!

Andrew, when you've done a few sheets of this film, I have a specific question for you: can you tell me what the base + fog is for the film? I'm curious if its as clear as FP4 or Delta 100.

Sure! What developer do you mainly use?

Andrew O'Neill

26-Oct-2022, 14:10

Thinner cardboard is ecological

No?

Yes, I suppose it is... but you can literally see the inner bag by lifting up a corner the flap! There is no inner box.

faberryman

26-Oct-2022, 14:14

Thinner cardboard is ecological

No?
Thick or thin, cardboard can be recycled. It will all end up as pulp, and reused.

Andrew O'Neill

26-Oct-2022, 15:12

I guess because at the end of the day, less paper is used?

paulbarden

26-Oct-2022, 16:17

Sure! What developer do you mainly use?

Specific to my question, that would be PMK. Thanks!

But I imagine you can assess B+F with any developer and at least get a good sense of the density.

Tin Can

27-Oct-2022, 04:29

Many in rural USA have no useable recycling

I can burn leaves, but do not, I mulch them

But any paper or cardboard is not burnable

By Law

Thick or thin, cardboard can be recycled. It will all end up as pulp, and reused.

paulbarden

27-Oct-2022, 06:53

Many in rural USA have no useable recycling

I can burn leaves, but do not, I mulch them

But any paper or cardboard is not burnable

By Law

I don't know about you, Randy, but I never recycle, burn, compost or otherwise destroy my paperboard sheet film boxes - they get used often, and if I ever have an excess, I know someone else will gladly take the surplus. I doubt many of us here destroy their empty boxes.

Tin Can

27-Oct-2022, 07:58

I was being generic

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52458428514_73e363f58a_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2nVzab3)Less is More (https://flic.kr/p/2nVzab3) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52458428514_73e363f58a_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2nVzab3)Less is More (https://flic.kr/p/2nVzab3) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

I don't know about you, Randy, but I never recycle, burn, compost or otherwise destroy my paperboard sheet film boxes - they get used often, and if I ever have an excess, I know someone else will gladly take the surplus. I doubt many of us here destroy their empty boxes.

paulbarden

27-Oct-2022, 09:24

I was being generic

Fear not, you'll never be generic, Randy!

Michael R

27-Oct-2022, 11:35

If you scan it to see why less material matters it says because marketing and cost cutting. How about that.

I was being generic

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52458428514_73e363f58a_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2nVzab3)Less is More (https://flic.kr/p/2nVzab3) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52458428514_73e363f58a_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2nVzab3)Less is More (https://flic.kr/p/2nVzab3) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

Andrew O'Neill

28-Oct-2022, 20:06

I'm chomping at the bit to test this stuff!

Tin Can

29-Oct-2022, 04:04

Please make one of your fascinating Vids!

I'm chomping at the bit to test this stuff!

Willie

29-Oct-2022, 07:54

Made contact to ask about 5x7.

"At the moment we do not have plans to do this, but could entertain a special order of 20 or more packs.

Best regards,

Omer Hecht"

Andrew O'Neill

2-Nov-2022, 13:32

paulbarden

2-Nov-2022, 14:57

So far I'm liking this stuff, although I have gotten past the step wedge phase. I've developed a bunch in Xtol-R, 1+1, Pyrocat-HD 1+1+50. The 1+1+50 dilution is too strong, for a decent range of curves... Good stain. Good B+F. (B+F in Xtol was lower .13 but didn't develop as long as I could have) tonight I'll develop a few sheets in Pyrocat-HD 1+1+100. I think that will be a more effective dilution.

Thank you for performing these important tests, Andrew. This is valuable information.

Have you gotten an impression of the nominal speed of the MK II version of the film? I found the previous version of X 80 had a functional speed of about 25, sometimes 32ASA, depending on the choice of developer. I'm expecting the MK II is going to be similar.

Andrew O'Neill

2-Nov-2022, 15:33

Thank you for performing these important tests, Andrew. This is valuable information.

Have you gotten an impression of the nominal speed of the MK II version of the film? I found the previous version of X 80 had a functional speed of about 25, sometimes 32ASA, depending on the choice of developer. I'm expecting the MK II is going to be similar.

With Xtol, the speed seemed slower than 80, and closer with Pyrocat-hd. But I'm I'm not 100% sure yet. I'll have a better idea when I take some out in the field. Got to do some box speed and reciprocity testing, too. My day job gets in the way of all this fun!

CreationBear

3-Nov-2022, 13:43

Andrew O'Neill

3-Nov-2022, 13:52

Looking forward to the sussing-ning :), especially if you start taking the negatives up to POP densities. Otherwise I’m assuming the sheets are physically up to snuff; I.e not prone to scratching, etc.?

Sussing-ning... Can I use that? :D I haven't scratched any negatives, and I've almost been through one box already.

CreationBear

3-Nov-2022, 17:10

Ha, Tennyson maintained he knew the metrical weight of every word in the English language except “scissors”—that’s right up there. At any rate I hope to see how you deal with the HP5 kallitypes.

gypsydog

14-Nov-2022, 11:33

Andrew, how is your x80 II test going any examples yet?

Andrew O'Neill

14-Nov-2022, 21:56

Andrew, how is your x80 II test going any examples yet?

I'm working on it slooooowly. I've got to get this 510-Pyro video out of the way first. I should have that one all edited by tomorrow, then I can concentrate on the MKII.

Andrew O'Neill

20-Nov-2022, 21:11

Developed a few sheets exposed to a stepwedge and developed in Xtol. Made curves. Went out this morning to field test. Hopefully will have a video up by next weekend. :D

Tin Can

21-Nov-2022, 02:09

Great!

I trust you!

Developed a few sheets exposed to a stepwedge and developed in Xtol. Made curves. Went out this morning to field test. Hopefully will have a video up by next weekend. :D

Andrew O'Neill

25-Nov-2022, 18:07

Here's a trailer!

https://youtu.be/yuYB5appEYE

sharktooth

25-Nov-2022, 18:16

Brad Pitt looks like he's put on a bit of weight for this role.

It definitely looks like it's going to be an exciting donut action thriller!!!

Andrew O'Neill

26-Nov-2022, 19:54

Brad Pitt looks like he's put on a bit of weight for this role.

It definitely looks like it's going to be an exciting donut action thriller!!!

I learnt that trick from my good buddy, De Niro! :rolleyes:

Andrew O'Neill

3-Dec-2022, 12:14

Just ordered a box of 8x10...

JMO

7-Mar-2023, 13:46

In case it might be helpful to other users of Cat Labs 80 MkII sheet film, I did some film speed testing recently in my darkroom to determine my EI values for this film using "Triple 7" developer. I used the method I learned from John Sexton which focuses on determining the exposure and development values (under your conditions) that will give you a densitometer reading of 0.10 above the reading for "film-base plus fog" (i.e., film developed after no exposure). My B&W densitometer is a Heiland TRD2. My other darkroom conditions were as follows:

JOBO Processor: CPP2 with water bath at 73F and rotation speed at #4
Film Drum: Expert 3010
Developer: Germain's Fine Grain, aka "Triple 7" (50% new stock + 50% used, 700-750ml per drum)
Development times: 6 and 8 minutes at 73F
Fixer: TF-5 at 1:3 for 5 minutes

Results: My EI values for Cat Labs 8- Mk II were 40 when developed for 6 minutes in the Triple 7, and 50 at 8 minutes development.

PS: I also attempted to determine my EI using D76 at 1:1 dilution (at 71F and 11 minutes in the JOBO), but found it would have to be somewhere lower (slower) than the slowest speed I tested which was ISO 40. I have not gone back and re-tested at ISO 20, 25 and 32, but assume my EI with D76 at 1:1 for 11 minutes would probably be either ISO 20 or 25.