so I shoot 1600 and consider 3200 to be push.
This is interesting and useful. Thanks for doing the tests and sharing your findings.
It would also be useful to compare the real-world results that you get with i) manufacturer's recommendations vs ii) your experimentally determined EI + developing time. If you plan to do this comparison, please do share your results.
Thanks again.
There's always non disclosure agreements, do not analyze agreements. Etc. This is ordinary and completely normal. Previous job we dealt with plastics and chemicals. If something was marked "business confidential" you didn't make copies, share even internally by email.
I don't see why people care who makes it???
And this is more of a pet peeve than anything else, but in my mind the examples posted are much better demonstrations of the vision of a particular photographer and use of interesting light than something that would tell me about how the film performs in a variety of situations and types of light.
I’m going to rate it at ISO 200 and shoot it in bright light, in dim light, indoors, outdoors…
Thanks for the link! Looks great and surprise surprise ISO 200-250…. Like what CatLabs says on its website.
Well then the obvious answer is to spend $6.99 and try it out!
...All this nonsense and conspiracy stuff is ruining this forum...
That is an answer to a (sort of) different question.
My comment was about the tendency to use dramatic and memorable photos, rather than mundane but technically revealing photos, to demonstrate the technical qualities of a new film.
Dark, weighty and relatively detail free shadows are great for drama, but not so great for showing much about the film!
Sort of like the car commercials that show family SUVs in environments that look great but aren't very revealing about how easy it is to load your groceries and toddlers when you've finished shopping at the supermarket.
Isn’t the whole point to take dramatic and memorable photos? That actually is what I want film to be good for. If I wanted mundane, I’d use my phone.
Isn’t the whole point to take dramatic and memorable photos? That actually is what I want film to be good for. If I wanted mundane, I’d use my phone.
That is an answer to a (sort of) different question.
My comment was about the tendency to use dramatic and memorable photos, rather than mundane but technically revealing photos, to demonstrate the technical qualities of a new film.
Thanks for the link! Looks great and surprise surprise ISO 200-250…. Like what CatLabs says on its website.
Did someone say it has a clear base?
I have some Adox 35mm with clear base. It is made in Germany according to the label.
Who makes ADOX?
Did Catlabs say "Germany"? They say "EU" instead.
If one understands "made in" as emulsion and coating made in the EU, and both done by same manufacturer, then these firms remain:
Adox
Agfa
Foma
Inoviscoat
Adox at the moment not even coat films of their own. They instead making a film for a competitor seems not likely. Not sure on them PET-base coating in Germany.
This film has nothing to do with Foma.
Did Catlabs say "Germany"? They say "EU" instead.
If one understands "made in" as emulsion and coating made in the EU, and both done by same manufacturer, then these firms remain:
Adox
Agfa
Foma
Inoviscoat
Adox at the moment not even coat films of their own. They instead making a film for a competitor seems not likely. Not sure on them PET-base coating in Germany.
Funniest post in this thread. If not of the year on PHOTRIO. Whether intentional or not.
Did Catlabs say "Germany"? They say "EU" instead.
If one understands "made in" as emulsion and coating made in the EU, and both done by same manufacturer, then these firms remain:
Adox
Agfa
Foma
Inoviscoat
Adox at the moment not even coat films of their own. They instead making a film for a competitor seems not likely. Not sure on them PET-base coating in Germany.
You failed to see the question in the post. Who makes ADOX?
...if I wanted to convince people to switch to my new film, I'd show more examples of how well it does many of the other things too...
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?