mshchem
Subscriber
Omer is a good fellow. Has helped me out on several occasions. Catlabs buys and sells everything analog. I would think on this forum such institutions would be welcome
Because we know, from experience, that this is an aerial surveillance film
Do we know that?
At this point I'm going to demand written pwoof, with all the necessary data and graphs hand plotted or I'll scweem and scweeem and scweem until i get it.
Omer is a good fellow. Has helped me out on several occasions. Catlabs buys and sells everything analog. I would think on this forum such institutions would be welcome
Ok, so I developed my second roll. First off, this film is very thin physically and I had light leaks/piping that affected the first pic. I had loaded my camera in daylight, but my back was to the sun (no choice as I was out n about) but still it seems I have to be much more careful loading compared to something like Kentmere 400.
This film also dries super flat. No curls at all, so that makes it very nice to handle.
My developer is Cinestill DF 96 Monobath, so all my thoughts are based on this. Obviously things would be different with other developers, but this is what I use with all my B&W films so it is easy for me to compare across the board. If you have a problem with DF96, use the developer you are happy with. That being said, in DF96 this film is contrasty and very punchy. It's not a film I'd pick for delicate landscapes, or even planned portraits if you want a multitude of tones. But it is a film that I would definitely pick if I wanted in your face 'loud' images. I think this would be great for street photography as it makes the images just jump at you. The type of shots where you want the subject matter to yell out their story, and you don't care about the nuances. For nuances, pick the awesome offerings like Acros II, your choice of Ilfords, etc.
This is about choice and picking what you want for the result you want.
Would it be my choice for an all-round film? Nope. That would be Kentmere 400 or HP5 if I'm feeling more splurgy. But if I'm going out looking to take some jumping images, Catlabs 320 PRO is where it is at. The kids - i.e. people who are the future of film photography and who avoid this site like the plague - will love this film.
Shot at iso 200, no filter.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Ahhhh, DTLA… a great place for photography. Haven’t been there for a few years. Now on the short list of things to do and places to go. Thanks for sharing your images, Huss.
Great pictures. Thanks for your contributions!
Ok, so I developed my second roll. First off, this film is very thin physically and I had light leaks/piping that affected the first pic. I had loaded my camera in daylight, but my back was to the sun (no choice as I was out n about) but still it seems I have to be much more careful loading compared to something like Kentmere 400.
This film also dries super flat. No curls at all, so that makes it very nice to handle.
My developer is Cinestill DF 96 Monobath, so all my thoughts are based on this. Obviously things would be different with other developers, but this is what I use with all my B&W films so it is easy for me to compare across the board. If you have a problem with DF96, use the developer you are happy with. That being said, in DF96 this film is contrasty and very punchy. It's not a film I'd pick for delicate landscapes, or even planned portraits if you want a multitude of tones. But it is a film that I would definitely pick if I wanted in your face 'loud' images. I think this would be great for street photography as it makes the images just jump at you. The type of shots where you want the subject matter to yell out their story, and you don't care about the nuances. For nuances, pick the awesome offerings like Acros II, your choice of Ilfords, etc.
This is about choice and picking what you want for the result you want.
Would it be my choice for an all-round film? Nope. That would be Kentmere 400 or HP5 if I'm feeling more splurgy. But if I'm going out looking to take some jumping images, Catlabs 320 PRO is where it is at. The kids - i.e. people who are the future of film photography and who avoid this site like the plague - will love this film.
Shot at iso 200, no filter.
However it says "made in EU" and Mobberly has not, last time I checked, unilaterally rejoined the EU.
These are fantastic! Thank you for sharing.
You’re welcome! Did you notice the film physically seemed unusually thin? Or is that my imagination?
It made it harder to load onto my Arista plastic reels that I never have any issues w other films.
I think so, yes. According to my caliper, about 0.02 mm thinner than 400TX. I agree that the film dries very flat and is easy to work with. Did you have a chance to examine grain in your high-resolution scans? Looking through a magnifier, it seemed very fine to me.
You’re welcome! Did you notice the film physically seemed unusually thin? Or is that my imagination?
It made it harder to load onto my Arista plastic reels that I never have any issues w other films.
Had the same difficulty. Only other film with which I had this problem is Adox CHS 100 ii.
You’re welcome! Did you notice the film physically seemed unusually thin? Or is that my imagination?
It made it harder to load onto my Arista plastic reels that I never have any issues w other films.
135 films on acetate base typically have base thickness of 0.12-0.13mm, those on polyester about 0.1mm. What @aparat measured seems about right for a polyester base.
I wonder what the deal is with Arista reels as I've loaded a lot of polyester based films onto my Paterson and Jobo reels and never had a problem.
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY: ![]() |