What would be the point for an alpha release film? Everything could change and some things probably will. Perhaps for a beta release.
I am surprised that nobody does a serious attempt to assess the ISO and development times in a structured manner? Just shooting something at random, developing and looking at the negatives does not cut it.
http://www.halfhill.com/speed1.html
http://www.halfhill.com/speed2.html
This is a fairly easy method!
Cheers,
Jonas
What is the point, then, saying it is 80 iso?
Well, I take a lot of pictures... And I like them to look good!I was referring to the exhaustive testing that the "testanistas" like to do rather than actually take pictures.
I was referring to the exhaustive testing that the "testanistas" like to do rather than actually take pictures.
What is a 'testanista'?
The term was defined by someone else on APUG. It is used to describe someone who compulsively tests things like film. The fact that the average person on Phottrio has neither the training not equipment to perform these tests does not dissuade them. So they will endlessly check the film box speed, spectral sensitivity, etc.
Not everyone on PhoPug is a hack, and some of us find these tests useful.The term was defined by someone else on APUG. It is used to describe someone who compulsively tests things like film. The fact that the average person on Phottrio has neither the training not equipment to perform these tests does not dissuade them. So they will endlessly check the film box speed, spectral sensitivity, etc.
I had that in my right testicle and it's extremely painful. It goes away after you have sex, which means I had it for a long time. My wife likes to see me suffer I guess.What is a 'testanista'?
Because unless the test is conducted with proper equipment, primarily a densitometer but also pure water, accurate thermometry, etc. it doesn't mean much.So what if someone likes to test film? I don't understand why it bothers some people here...
So what if someone likes to test film? I don't understand why it bothers some people here...
First let me say that I was talking about obsessive testing in my post. I made that point clear. That is testing to the actual detriment of taking photographs.
Most APUGers are not able to do the necessary testing correctly. For testing film speed you need the necessary equipment; step wedge, densitometer, ... Other tests may need different equipment. Also needed is a knowledge of statistics in order to understand the data. A single datum is really meaningless you need at least three in order to have any confidence in your results. A single datum can be far off but you would never know. Manufacturers like Kodak and Ilford spend considerable time and money testing their products. They can do a far better job than anyone on APUG. It takes a bit of hubris to believe that you can do better.
I would say that most people here are interested in images, ie the actual taking of photographs. We find it a bit strange that one's goal is something else. It is certainly improper tor give the impression especially to newbies that everyone must make these tests. Nothing could be further from the truth and it turns some people off to photography. If you read the book by Richard J Henry "Controls In Black-And-White photography" you would realize just how much latitude there is in photography. I highly recommend this book.
Andy,Yes, I get all that but... these people who are referred to as "testanistas" are doing what they feel comfortable, and it's not our place to criticise them. It comes across as snobbery.
My wife likes to see me suffer I guess.
YUP!You mean your wife is a normal one, then?
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?