Well, now that you all mention ULF, who is selling 12x20 film? With the exit of J&C I have no idea where to get film. I looked at Freestyle, but they don't list it. So, any ideas?
Well, now that you all mention ULF, who is selling 12x20 film? With the exit of J&C I have no idea where to get film. I looked at Freestyle, but they don't list it. So, any ideas?
Jorge, Freestyle is showing BPF200 and also Efke PL25 and PL100 in 12x20. Go to B&W sheet film and select 12x20 on the "size" menu.
Originally Posted by Oren Grad
The View Camea Store is listing both FP4+ and HP5+.
Sandy King
Thanks guys....now I have to test again....grrrrrr....
Just be thankful you learned how to test film with BTZS. At least you can get all the data you need about a new film in an evening of testing instead of days with the other system.
Sandy
The "other" system works just as quickly and gets you to the same place.
Lets not start another series of snide remarks and competition as to which is the best. There are many ways to skin this cat. There has been too much of this and the peace and quiet the last few months has been refreshing.
steve simmons
I think your comment is out of line. My remark was directed to Jorge and was not in any way meant to be snide, merely to point out the fact that since he uses BTZS testing he will be able to quickly compile exposure and development data for his new film.
The other system is certainly capable of fine results and may eventually get you to the same place. But it definitely will not get you there as quickly. BTZS testing is without question more efficient, and almost everyone who has used and really understands the two systems would agree with that assessment.
And BTZS testing is especially useful in a case like this where one has to start working with a new film. In two hours of testing and plotting Jorge will have all the information he needs to expose and develop his new film, for any process exposure scale and for any subject lighting condition. There is no way anyone could compile that much data with the other system as quickly. That is not to say that the other system is defective or that it is not also capable of excellent results.
Sandy King
Don't mean to get back on topic, but I read the editorial and it seemed to say that most commercial photography has gone digital and analogue is dead for that sector of photography. It goes on to say that it is a kind of blessing for fine art photography because it makes analogue work more unique and "collectable". I think the editorial was trying to state that this could be considered a positive trend by making the analogue fine art photography more distinct, and raise more interest in the medium.
Sandy - I really enjoyed your article. I will be subscribing to get the rest of the series of carbon print articles.
But it definitely will not get you there as quickly. BTZS testing is without question more efficient, and almost everyone who has used and really understands the two systems would agree with that assessment.
Anyone familar with the Picker method can do one test with 6 negatives processed in one batch and determine their
personal EI
proper proof time
dev time for normal scenes.
Perhaps someone familiar with BTZS can do the same but certainly not any more quickly.
If someone is not familar and just beginning the Picker method is far more user friendly.
That's it for me in his discussion.
As I said, there has been peace and quiet here in this area of the forum for several months and I appreciate that very much
There are many ways to skin this cat and they will both get you to the same place. Regardless of your system, your vision will require a certain density for your desired tonal range and either system, or a hybred which is what most BTZS people really use, will get you to the same place.
We have placed descriptions of both approaches in the Free Articles section of the View Camera web site. We invite any and all to read the articles and use whatever method works for them
steve simmons
www.viewcamera.com
BTZS testing will give you the above data, and much more. For example, it will give you the proper exposure and development time *not* only for normal scenes, but for N conditions ranging from N-6 to N+2-4. And it will do this for *any* process exposure scale, whether the process be carbon, silver or palladium. And you get that data in about two hours of testing, with a new film about which you know little or nothing.
I also encourage people to read as much as they can and make up their own minds as to which system best suits their needs.
Recently you published in View Camera an article by Phil Davis on BTZS, for which I sincerely thank you . Hopefully you can make this article available in the free articles section on the View Camera web site to which you often direct readers here on the LF forum.
Sandy
Last edited by sanking; 17-May-2007 at 15:24.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks