The ASA standard no longer exists. It became ANSI, was revised several times, and then eventually became iso. Essentially the box makes no claim of any currently enforced standard.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_speed#ASA
The ASA standard no longer exists. It became ANSI, was revised several times, and then eventually became iso. Essentially the box makes no claim of any currently enforced standard.Both terms refer to a given standard. A film contained in a box with such designation has to qualify to this.
This is a legal matter, not a historic one.
As intended.The ASA standard no longer exists. It became ANSI, was revised several times, and then eventually became iso. Essentially the box makes no claim of any currently enforced standard.
For certain.As intended.
The ASA standard no longer exists.
yeah- I see that on their website now. That should probably be changed to asa 80 or as you've suggested.The box doesn't, but the Ferrania website does. They probably should have just said EI80 instead of ISO. Not that it really matters.
Dead Link Removed
If you refer to it, then the film must comply to that standard.
It does not matter if it still exists as prescribed standard.
The ISO standard for b&w film was even built 1974 upon the ASA standard.
My point is it's not a standard anymore. It hasn't been since the 70's. The organization itself no longer exists but has become ANSI and ASA certifications are defunct. Saying you meet a criteria to a standard that is no longer enforced means nothing. It's like claiming you obey a law that no longer exists or that you're a resident of a country that no longer exists. Now their website clearly states 80 ISO- that's a whole other story. With that I agree with you.There are EU regulations about what to fulfill stated on a product packaging.
Some terms on packages are vague as are some images, and in cases they are nonetheless allowed by regulations. But a reference to an idustrial standard is not vague at all.
There are EU regulations about what to fulfill stated on a product packaging.
Some terms on packages are vague as are some images, and in cases they are nonetheless allowed by regulations. But a reference to an idustrial standard is not vague at all.
Probably having fun making complaining noises. I was.Is there an ISO standard for alpha and beta products in regards to black and white film speed determination? I would be surprised if there were. Does anyone here actually know, or are we just having fun making complaining noises? What does ISO 6:1993 say about alpha release products?
In the meantime Ferrania needs to test film and communicate its probable speed to the test market, and it seems utterly harmless to use "ISO80" as a guide for photographers analyzing and labs developing their pre-production film.
There are EU regulations about what to fulfill stated on a product packaging.
Some terms on packages are vague as are some images, and in cases they are nonetheless allowed by regulations. But a reference to an idustrial standard is not vague at all.
As we have stated about 1000 times - and as anyone can see if they look at our Instagram, Facebook or website - nearly everyone is shooting the film at 80 ISO and loving their results.
Considering that most films listed as 400 ISO (for example) are actually somewhere between 320-360 ISO, I'm guessing that the regulations are not as stringent as you suggest.
If printing 80 ASA on our box lands us in EU court, I guess that will be just one more problem to add on to the already very large pile.
Just a correction on this. The ISO criteria for determining emulsion speed are quite stringent. If a film is listed as ISO 400, it is ISO 400, not somewhere between 320-360. The fact some people find their personal EIs to be lower than 400 has nothing to do with the ISO speed being wrong or inaccurate. They are just targeting different criteria than the ISO standard specifies, and/or using different test methodologies. If a film has not been tested as set out in the standard, the speed should really be given the designation EI (exposure index).
Just trying to clarify what is meant by "ISO" for film speed from a sensitometric perspective. I'm definitely not a lawyer.
Sorry but this statement makes no sense if you understand how film speed is determined. It's a non sequitur.
+ 1Hmmm.. you have to excuse me, ISO, Mice 0, ASO, so what!
Thank you Film Ferrania for a great .. ALPHA .. film, and giving us something to start with. Two thumbs up!
Like the film, and waiting to order some more as we only got three to start with.
They look great! I especially like the shot of the open/close toggle switches.This next roll recipe comes from Tom Sebastiano and his use of Tetenal's Paranol S. 1:50 14 minutes @ 20C, 30s initial agitation, 10s/minute thereafter.
These were shot with a recently-serviced 1971 Nikon F2 with various Nikkor lenses in a combination of soft light and direct sunlight. Scanned in a Pakon F135 to linear and inverted using colorperfect. No contrast, brightness, etc. adjustments have been made. Box speed.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/thekurgan/albums/72157663799161567
Sorry for the link, images seem too large to upload here.
They look great! I especially like the shot of the open/close toggle switches.
Just to make it clear : ISO is nothing different than ASA or DIN - perhaps I have missed some urgend infos years ago ?
ASA 50 films are "still" ASA 50 films to me - IF I remember 18 DIN. they still have 18DIN - and my camera allways call me : "feed me with 18DIN. I am hungry - nevertheless they are rated with ISO 50 that's it. ISO give both classifications in one formula from my example with Pan F : ISO 50/18 .....so ISO is not the biggest "deal" am I correct or am I correct?
with regards
PS : Hope I give not "oil" in this fire now
Hello
Here are a few from the latest roll, these shot in a Canon P with a 50mm 1.8 Canon lens and developed in PyrocatHD
Half were shot at 80 and the other half 40.
I have ordered some Paranol S to try as I liked the results shown, I will also try a stand develop with Rodinal as well
Here is a link to the album on Flickr for all the photos from this roll.
https://flic.kr/s/aHsmfESMDR
Ore cart at 40iso
View attachment 195720
Old church building at 40iso
View attachment 195721
Market at 80iso
View attachment 195722
One is not more important than another. ISO speed is dependent on, indeed determined by, the processing. That's why the manufacturer is allowed to chooses the developer and processing parameters to ascertain ISO. You would think a film manufacturer would understand that.Further support of the notion that processing matters more than the ISO used to shoot them.
Sorry but this statement makes no sense if you understand how film speed is determined. It's a non sequitur.
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?