Kodak price increase, and reduction, for 2025

[brbo]

the thing that 'gave it away' was not the detail/resolution/resolving power, but an entirely unrelated type of artefact I'm familiar with on 100F specifically.

The infamous "pepper grain"?

 

[koraks]

The infamous "pepper grain"?

Bingo!

 

[Ivo Stunga]

I'll scan the frames at 11'000 or 14'000ppi, which will also allow to evaluate the grain texture (your Plustek will do 3000ppi at best)

I imagine this will command a quite a lot of pretty pennies. If you'd do this for free/sport - that'd be additional push to make said test as I've never seen scans of such res and that alone could drive this activity!

if this is the sharpest lens you have, center performance at F5.6 to F8 should be very good

Other Zuiko I have is 24mm 2.8. I have access also to different system: a FED-2 rangefinder and Industar 61LD - but I assume it's not as good as Zuiko in SLR.

The infamous "pepper grain"?

Oh, it even has a name - the more you know! : D

 

[dokko]

I imagine this will command a quite a lot of pretty pennies. If you'd do this for free/sport - that'd be additional push to make said test as I've never seen scans of such res and that alone could drive this activity!

sure, that was meant as a free offer to support the test, since I know how much effort this kind of endeavour requires.

Other Zuiko I have is 24mm 2.8. I have access also to different system: a FED-2 rangefinder and Industar 61LD - but I assume it's not as good as Zuiko in SLR.

yes, of those the Zukio 50m is likely the one with highest resolution.

 

[brbo]

sure, that was meant as a free offer to support the test, since I know how much effort this kind of endeavour requires.

That is very kind and both of you will contribute to a "one more thing that I learned* on Photrio".


* and that was backed up by something more than a wall of "trust me bro" text

 

[Ivo Stunga]

Thanks for the offer @dokko

Even if I learn that I'm full of shit - it'd be a valuable lesson! :F

 

[brbo]

Even if I learn that I'm full of shit - it'd be a valuable lesson! :F

Well, you should hope you are wrong, because that will enable you to keep shooting slide film that is available and not the one that is not.

On the other hand, who's to say that 100.000dpi is enough for you slide projection nuts...

 

[Ivo Stunga]

will enable you to keep shooting slide film that is available and not the one that is not.

Exactly my thinking! It's not important if I'm right or not - truth is what matters and this is a solid opportunity to test out my use-case, eyeballing and setup exactly. It would be silly to refuse that scan offer!

 

[dokko]

Just use a resolution test chart under controlled conditions and strobes so you can quantify the results. The whole setup with a natural, outdoor setup is doomed to fail if you're trying to make an honest comparison.

I don't fully agree with that...
Resolution targets have their merit, but it's also are very challenging to ensure to get optimal focus on analog cameras (you'll actually have to do some kind of bracketing).

also films are much more complex than lines on a resolution pattern, hard lines are one thing to resolve, but pattern like grass or clouds will look differently on different film, and not always the "best" with the highest resolution film.

real world scenes also have their challenges, the biggest being light consistency, and to make sure that there's structures of different frequencies (details).

 

[DREW WILEY]

Ivo - Bingo! That Tiffen 812 is a sandwich style filter (two glass elements with a colored thermal foil in between) which will definitely produce a bit of resolution loss of the type which might be only annoying to typical large format usage, but becomes more of a factor when blowing up tiny 35mm frames. It's also something of a sledgehammer when it comes to warming the emulsion, more like a sledgehammer when you really need a tack hammer. It's a relevant tool when you need to drastically warm an image the skintone direction, but risks an odd look when you really need something a lot more subtle in terms of color temp change.

It's best to use multicoated glass filter by Hoya, B&W etc.

 

[Ivo Stunga]

It was a quick purchase with 10x respooled E100D to see if I'd like the warming effect - only now I read it's uncoated and that explains stuff. I shot also without filter just to compare and yes - found what you say: loss of fidelity.
Unfildered shots were for sure better. And colder.

What's your filter recommendation if it turns out I can use E100 afterall? I have a Hoya CPL and it's lovely.

 

[albireo]

I used to use a Hoya HMC 81A pretty much all the time with Sensia 100. Would it be a good all rounder with E100 too?

 

[DREW WILEY]

81A is good if for overcast skies lending a distinct overall blue cast to the scene; otherwise, a bit heavy itself. A true Euro KR1.5 from B&W or Heliopan has a bit more salmon tinge to it and not quite as yellowish as an 81-series filter, so might be a little more versatile. But I would always have on hand something gentler than either, like a simple 1B Hoya light pink skylight filter.

I use these kinds of filters more in relation to color negative film. With chromes, sometimes the color "errors" actually look pleasing. But this particular thread involves certain people who prefer the warmer look of Provia or Velvia versus the cooler balance of E100; so in that case, using a GENTLE warming filter in the case of E100 would bring them closer together.

Those familiar with color temp meters and accompanying filtration will understand this best.

 

[MattKing]

I appreciate @dokko 's offer.
But if you need a 14,000 ppi scan to determine which film is better for your projection needs and preferences, then you are probably looking at the wrong things on that projection screen.
The films available differ substantially, in a variety of ways. Choose what suits your preferences and needs. Refrain from discounting the choices that others make, because those choices reflect their needs and preferences.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Here's my test of Provia and Ektachrome. Ektachrome has redder reds and more intense greens. (4x5 originals scanned with Epson V850 edited in Lightroom).

 

[Ivo Stunga]

But if you need a 14,000 ppi scan to determine which film is better for your projection needs and preferences, then you are probably looking at the wrong things on that projection screen.

Or... are just tempted by that scan offer as an experience alone with some chances to find out if E100 is good for me after all for some subjects. I'll probably end up shooting Provia and Velvia anyways - for the price and color alone.

That said - it could still be nice to fukk around and find out. Because when I bought them I didn't expect to see what I saw from those rolls of E100.

 

[Ivo Stunga]

To elaborate - if I'd be experiment avoiding type of guy, I'd never pick up BW Reversal as it consists of nearly endless experimentation.
There's no Massive Dev Chart for BW Reversal or Reversal times/Recipes printed inside the film box. And there's hardly any established knowledge base to begin with - experiment is the king and talk is just talk. I don't accept "trust me, bro", I accept a hands-on approach. Spec sheets can lie too - especially when it comes to Rollei Analog. Pro BW Reversal labs can lie too - due to business interests or poor reversal effort alone. Intentionally misleading or not.

Doing BW Reversal I have to come up with my own dev times, agitation schemes or PQ Universal Concentrations (haven't yet tried this variable much, just reduced the quantity down to play nice with my containers and seem to notice reduced contrast a bit) to catch normal development times. Then Push/Pull times as well, going by shadow detail and leader density, eyeballing leader against a light source. Stand Reversal in PQ Universal is possible too and I'd never know that if I'd shy away from experiments. This applies to every film I pick up. Every. And I pick up many.
Doing this it's quite impossible to not notice similarities that tend to verify or dismiss repackaged film claims.
If any given BW 135 film comes on PET base (a rarity in 135), has water-soluble AH layer (additional layer of rarity in 135), has the same smell and PET base thickness - it's a very fucking strong indicator of a repackaged technical/aerial product. And if a bunch of seemingly unrelated films reverse to the same apparent contrast/density in one Dev Time/Agitation combo - that's another ultra-strong indicator of a repackaged product.

DR5 said Ilford Reversal doesn't work and provided poor effort samples as an example. My experiments proved otherwise.
People said that fast films cannot be reversed. My experiments with Kentmere 400, X-TRA 400 and Delta 3200 says the opposite.
It's possible to reverse C-41 film to have nice dark-key slides. Why? Just because I can and wanted to.
It's possible to do BW Reversal on E-6 film. Tried it as a proof of concept with very poorly stored and very expired, everything thin and pink-rendering Ektachrome 64 just for giggles alone, as it was pointless to waste money on E-6 development with this.


Having these experiences - to test E100 Vs Provia 100F is just another normal step in that direction. If people will throw "test invalid, because reason X" - I'll just duly note that, because what matters to me: to test the film the way I use it and with subjects I shoot the most with equipment I have, rendering any additional points quite moot as my aim is not to make an alternative film spec-sheet PDF out of this, but to check thoroughly if I can find a place for E100 in my camera bag and if my loud statements are hasty and erroneous, or have some merit. And to what degree.
Maybe I got mixed up with cameras/lenses and uncoated warming filters, and misremember stuff with poor note-keeping as icing on the top (although I use Exif Notes app)? This test will show stuff and there lies the value.

And that scan offer as an interesting experience/collaboration with a kind stranger from Germany - what's not to like?