Are we entering the era 400 asa film....

[sperera]

Just like we're supposed to be "in the times of the gentiles" in a biblical sense is it now the "times of the of 400 asa film"?

So I'm a sinner and apart from using an enlarger and doing optical prints I work in a hybrid scenario cos I have to promote myself for a living......

Thus, having to scan negatives and finding newton ring problems on all 100 asa films I'm using compared to no problems scanning 400 asa film - I am actually thinking of swtiching fully to 400 asa films as they seem to be the best all-rounders.....not to mention the usability of 2 extra stops.....

Note: The other day i did some optical prints on the enlarger and I went half blind trying to find the damn grain to focus the enlarger with just like 100 asa film!!!!! and that was Tri-X 400 believe it or not done in Xtol stock.

 

[SchwinnParamount]

The newton rings may be an artifact of the scanner. I scan 100 speed film with my Nikon scanner and have no issues.

DISCLAIMER: My film scanning is only done to get a quick and un manipulated image. I find that batch scanning is more efficient than creating and using the proof sheet. All of my images that appear on APUG are scanned prints made on my ancient flatbed scanner.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

I'm firmly entrenched in the new T-Max 400 era.... I would mention those two extra stops FIRST!

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Judging by the fact that you can use Tmax 400 in 35mm and make projection prints to 11x14 look sharper and with tighter grain than Plus-X or FP4+ is interesting. You can also use a developer like Rodinal if you really like texture. The grain will increase in size by a hair. So it's flexible.

If I didn't NEED two stops less, and bad reciprocity failure at around 1s for gaining controllable shutter speeds and longer shutter speeds with my pinhole camera, I would shoot nothing other than TMY-2. I love the stuff, but am forced to use FP4+, Plus-X, or Foma 100 with the pinhole. (They are also FANTASTIC films, but I would prefer to need just one single emulsion for consistency and ease of use).

 

[David William White]

I don't think the speed of the film has anything to do with the presence of newton rings, so you may be barking up the wrong tree. I thought it was caused by the base side of the film being in contact with the scanner (or carrier) glass. All I can think of is that your 400 film lies flatter in the neg holder than your 100 speed film, for some secondary reason.

 

[Andrew Moxom]

I've run into scanner issues with newtons rings when using 100 speed film like ACROS. The emulsion side is very fine and does cause me heartburn in that regard. However, Neopan-400, and TXP 320 do not do this to me. I wonder if it's something to do with the smoothness of the emulsion rather than actual speed or grain size. The reason I say that is that TMY-II sometimes does it to me.. not all the time, just sometimes! I scan by placing the emulsion side directly onto the scanner platen.

 

[sperera]

Im taking exactly about Acros and T-Max.....I'm drum scanning too.....so they go on a cylinder.....isnt it a fact faster film speed negatives are thicker than 100 asa film?

I've run into scanner issues with newtons rings when using 100 speed film like ACROS. The emulsion side is very fine and does cause me heartburn in that regard. However, Neopan-400, and TXP 320 do not do this to me. I wonder if it's something to do with the smoothness of the emulsion rather than actual speed or grain size. The reason I say that is that TMY-II sometimes does it to me.. not all the time, just sometimes! I scan by placing the emulsion side directly onto the scanner platen.

 

[SuzanneR]

This subject, I think, is better suited to our sister site, Hybrid Photo. You should be able to get some good detailed information there.

http://www.hybridphoto.com/forums/home.php