Gigabitfilm homepage parts in english

[Pete Andrews]

Armin, this is a LARGE FORMAT forum. Hardly anyone here gives a rodent's backside for super fine-grain, high-resolution film, either Gigabit or Techpan.If you could show us some examples of its superb gradation, then we might be interested. So; what's the TONALITY of it like?

[Pete Watkins]

Armin, well said. I'm intrested in your question as I live in the UK and any large format film is well overpriced. I find it very sad that some contributers to this site are willing to critisise you because English is not your first language. Pete.

[Pete Andrews]

Excuse me?Where have I criticised Armin personally, or his use of English?I take exception to that particular accusation, and I'm doubly insulted, since the translation on Gigabit's website is taken almost verbatim from one that I and a German colleague posted on this forum about 6 months ago.

My only 'beef' is with this Gigabit film, and the ridiculous claims made for it; like resolving a ladies watch hand at 100 metres.It's now well known that this is nothing more than Agfa copying film, souped in a special developer, and as such, I don't believe that it's at all suitable, or reliable, for everyday pictorial use. Armin himself admits that the contrast of the film is on the high side.The absense of any published independent scans from this film simply reinforces my suspicion about the claims made for it.All I can say about Gigabit film is, "show me the money".

[Pete Watkins]

Armin, I have never heard of this film and I have had some very satisfactory results on Tech Pan. I will try to find a supplier of Gigabitfilm in the U.K. Remember that Birmingham is not the interlectural center of the United Kingdom, that is further south.

[Pete Andrews]

I tend to stay away from any 'interlectural center' where they can't even spell the phrase.

Armin, I don't work for Ilford, but I am concerned about honesty and integrity. Gigabit haven't shown those qualities in their advertising. They claim it's a new and original film, which it isn't. They also make fantastic claims for its resolution, which they then 'illustrate' with a picture that just isn't technically possible, and they give a confused methodology by which they supposedley obtained their fantastic picture.The whole setup is misleading, since all they're selling is a developer. If they were upfront about that, then I would leave the subject alo

[Pete Watkins]

Wow, an 021 who can spell (yes, I know that it's 0121 now). See ya, Pete.