Acros Thoughts?

brofkand · Aug 10, 2009

What are everyone's thoughts on Fuji Acros?

I'm looking at a good 100 speed film for studio use (120 rollfilm) and Acros immediately attracted me because it's about a buck a roll cheaper than Ilford or Fuji (I have had bad experiences with the Foma stuff).

How does it work in Rodinal or D-76? Is it best shot at box speed or under/over exposed and over/under developed? Does it curl up like Foma?

Does anyone have any scans of the negs? I'd imagine for a 100 speed film it should have relatively little grain, esp. in 120, and it should be sharp.

What are the bad and good points on Acros?

Thanks!

Dan Henderson · Aug 10, 2009

I like how Ilford FP4 stains with the catechol developer that I use, so that is my go-to film. But if I don't want (or need) to deal with reciprocity, Acros is my backup film. It makes great prints for me, even though it does not seem to take the stain as well as FP4.

Peter De Smidt · Aug 10, 2009

It has the best reciprocity characteristics of any film I know of. It is extremely fine-grained. It has a pretty straight line characteristic curve in standard developers. I expose it at EI 64, but you should test for yourself. I develop it in Pyrocat-MC.

chriscrawfordphoto · Aug 10, 2009

I like it in Rodinal 1+50 and as others have mentioned it works magnificently for very long exposures.

The first one was shot in a Hasselblad in fairly bright light. The middle one was shot in a dim building, a church built in 1851 that was set on fire by Vandals last year. 90 second exposure in the Hasselblad. The last was with a Mamiya 645 as the sun had just gone down. It was a 4 minute exposure!

brofkand · Aug 10, 2009

Chris,

Are those scans of the negative or scans of prints?

I love the tonal range of those photographs. I've never gotten anything close with Plus-X. It's my lack of experience more than the film though, I reckon.

Mark Fisher · Aug 10, 2009

It was remarkable....it seemed like everyone at this year's photostock was using Acros in 120. Rodinal and Pyrocat seem to be the developer of choice. I've used both and settled on Rodinal, but both are excellent. (there was a url link here which no longer exists) is a portrait with Acros in Rodinal 1:50 for 12 minutes, agitated every minute. Ignore the blown highlights...my scanner has trouble with subtle highlights on prints.

Mark

r-brian · Aug 10, 2009

Acros in Rodinal is my main 120 combo. Soup it in Rodinal 1:100, 18 min, 68 F, easy agitation on the minute.

This series I shot with a 1952 Rolleiflex: http://s42.photobucket.com/albums/e310/r-brian/Forgotten Souls/

Athiril · Aug 10, 2009

Acros is great!

I love it, along with FP4, and Shanghai GP3 (amazing in Rodinal, works well in Xtol too), GP3 is also extremely cheap for a pack of 10 rolls from hong kong over ebay including shipping, I find it sits nice and flat after drying in stock film holders for scanning, unlike many Kodak products.

Pro 400H has a lot more curve than GP3 to squash those internet rumours too.

Vonder · Aug 10, 2009

I believe everybody who claims to "love" a certain film does so based on one particular photo, one that really took their breath away. For whatever reason, this is my "breathtaker" photo and it's shot on Acros:

Since I took this photo about 3 years ago I've used mainly Acros. I use Tmax400 when I need more speed, but Acros (developed in Xtol 1+3) is what i choose when low lightis not a big concern. I love the way this film looks.

JLP · Aug 10, 2009

If i did not already like Acros this photos would convince me to like it. Lovely smile and a pretty girl.

brian steinberger · Aug 11, 2009

This thread has interested me in trying some Acros. I've been in love with Neopan 400 for the past 3 years and occasionally shoot a slower film which for me now has been FP4.

Not to hijack the thread, but as far as I know Acros is a "tabular" grained film as opposed to Neopan 400 which is traditional. Is this correct? How do the two compare?

Btw... all the photos in this thread are wonderful!

clayne · Aug 11, 2009

brofkand said:
Chris,

Are those scans of the negative or scans of prints?

I love the tonal range of those photographs. I've never gotten anything close with Plus-X. It's my lack of experience more than the film though, I reckon.

Look like neg scans to me. If those are prints, then my hats off to the printer.

Mark Fisher · Aug 11, 2009

brian steinberger said:
This thread has interested me in trying some Acros. I've been in love with Neopan 400 for the past 3 years and occasionally shoot a slower film which for me now has been FP4.

Not to hijack the thread, but as far as I know Acros is a "tabular" grained film as opposed to Neopan 400 which is traditional. Is this correct? How do the two compare?

Btw... all the photos in this thread are wonderful!

I'm not a big shooter of Neopan, but the Acros is their version of tabular grain. I did not care for tabular grain fims until I saw Acros. In low light, acros is the fastest film around since it has no reciprocity problems at any reasonable exposure. FP4 was my former 120 film, but Acros is better on all the measures I care about so I am happy to use it.

Mark

marco.taje · Aug 11, 2009

Well, my first post here, but it's worth it!
Just a quick one to say that Acros is my low speed film of choice. I love it. Also, in my opinion Fuji is publishing much nicer data about their films (i.e. contrast gradients vs dev time).
I always soup Acros in Paterson FX39 1+19. This combination is unrivalled to me, and the slight compensating effect of FX39 leaves my EI up there at 100, with just-right contrast (for my workflow, at least) and wonderful sharpness.
Here's a negative scan done with a Nikon Coolscan 9000. The neg was shot with a Hassy 503cx and a Planar 100mm.

Happy shooting

rphenning · Aug 11, 2009

I really like Acros rated at 50-64 in Perceptol.

rphenning · Aug 11, 2009

also, I pushed a roll to 400 in ID11 and the grain was negligible. I prefer fomapan over it simply due to price:quality. I notice that Acros has a much greater range, in my opinion, than the Fomapan when both are rated at 50 or 64. I have a well supply of both for the apocalypse.

chriscrawfordphoto · Aug 11, 2009

brofkand said:
Chris,

Are those scans of the negative or scans of prints?

I love the tonal range of those photographs. I've never gotten anything close with Plus-X. It's my lack of experience more than the film though, I reckon.

They are scans from negs. I can't do darkroom printing anymore, the chemicals caused health problems for me...I have a lot of severe allergies that developed after years of working with photo-chemicals. I had done my own printing from the time I was 15 until I was 26. I'm 33 now and have been scanning my negs with a Nikon LS-8000ED since then. I had an advantage in transitioning because I was already knowledgeable of Photoshop and printing with a computer from the graphic design work that I do. I was a VERY good darkroom printer, but I think my hybrid workflow is giving me better overall results.

chriscrawfordphoto · Aug 11, 2009

clayne said:
Look like neg scans to me. If those are prints, then my hats off to the printer.

These are scans from the film, but you should see my prints, they're just as beautiful

2F/2F · Aug 11, 2009

It's a nice film with excellent reciprocity. Very "T-Max-like" in regards to grain and seemingly in regards to curve shape (I say "seemingly" because I have never tested myself). I don't use it often because of the latter (I personally prefer curves that look like pretzels for most of what I shoot), but when I want to shoot long exposures, I use it or T-Max 100.

P C Headland · Aug 11, 2009

I really like it.

I shoot it at box speed and develop either in Rodinal 1+100 for 18 minutes, or PC-TEA 1+50 for 10 minutes. Lovely tonality, sharp & no grain to speak of. Dries flat too.

Chris Nielsen · Aug 11, 2009

P C Headland said:
I really like it.

I shoot it at box speed and develop either in Rodinal 1+100 for 18 minutes, or PC-TEA 1+50 for 10 minutes. Lovely tonality, sharp & no grain to speak of. Dries flat too.

Sorry, a little OT here, but where in NZ do you get your Rodinal from? I have never seen anyone carry it around here

jp80874 · Aug 11, 2009

Has anything changed on importing sheet film to the US? I would really like to try 8x10. I checked Freestyle and B&H and found no sheet film. I understand there is a dealer in Japan who will send it. How are the delivered costs for this anywhere in the USA compared to FP4 and T-Max? If the price is competitive, has the dealer been reliable? Do you buy on his website? If so what is the url? If not how do you buy-communicate?

Thanks,

John Powers

Larry.Manuel · Aug 11, 2009

>Acros in Rodinal is my main 120 combo. Soup it in Rodinal 1:100, 18 min, 68 F, easy agitation on the minute.

Me too, except after three or four agitations in the first minute, one inversion every three minutes. Recently, I was making my first 16x20 print from 120 Acros, and I could barely detect the grain with the grain magnifier. With Rodinal, I expose at EI 100. I've had wonderful results at EI 200 using DD-X.

colrehogan · Aug 11, 2009

John,
have you checked with Badger Graphic or Midwest Photo Exchange? As far as I know, they both have sold Fuji Acros sheet film in the past. I got my last 8x10 Acros from Mpex. I have also purchased from Megaperls (which now goes by the name of Japan Exposures) Dead Link Removed

BetterSense · Aug 11, 2009

I prefer fomapan over it simply due to price:quality.

I like the grain of fomapan 100 a lot too, but the damn stuff stains my replenished D23 blue. I don't know if this is a problem but I don't like my developer looking like kool-aid so I'm transitioning to Acros for 100 speed. Hopefully it's a bit faster as well.

Acros Thoughts?

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency