Just one more quick clarification:
my reversal process for photographic paper consists of 3 baths and does not require potassium dichromate or thiocyanate. It is simple and not complicated at all.
But the film-reversal process you use in your commercial lab is a 10-bath, 20-step process.
I develop the films in my lab
For films like Agfa Scala, Adox Scala 160, Adox Silvermax and Ilford FP4+, what is the difference in the quality of results one gets from your reversal kit vs your lab?
Unfortunately, Foma has currently changed the emulsion of the R100 film so that sufficient quality cannot be achieved with it. Therefore, I must exclude Foma R100 at this time.
I meant is there any difference in sharpness and grain of the results from your reversal kit compared to those of your ten step lab process.
Yes, it is sad! In the past, the Foma R100 was a good film, at times quite comparable to the Scala.Have they? Foma R100 is meant to be a slide BW film, it is surprising that they changed for worse.
I feel there's some demystifying to be done in the world of BW Reversal, but I'm nearly not enough technically educated to to this - so I'll point out some curiosities out of my experience instead.
Over the years I've:
But the film-reversal process you use in your commercial lab is a 10-bath, 20-step process.
My process is intended for all original black and white slide films.
Unfortunately, Foma has currently changed the emulsion of the R100 film so that sufficient quality cannot be achieved with it. Therefore, I must exclude Foma R100 at this time.
This leaves Agfa Scala, Adox Scala 160, and Adox Silvermax (all to be exposed like ISO 200/24).
Since these films will not be available in the foreseeable future, I have recommended Ilford FP-4 as an alternative. It has the best image quality. However, it is recommended to calibrate the currently available batch with a test film.
OMG ... so many?!?!
Can't understand how one could use 20 steps for it!!
Yes, but this is because you intend to project slides and you want to expand the dynamic range as much as possible.
However if the slides are to be scanned, this is not a requisite, and in fact perhaps the dynamic range should be reduce to better match the scanner's capability.
Slides for scanning purposes do make sense, because they allow the photographer to quickly evaluate the image before scanning, without the need of contact prints, etc.
Just my 0.2 deutschemarks on this.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?