In relative spectral response curves one used percentage scales as well as logarithmic scales, both related to the yielded density. This one is a logarithmic one.
This means one step on that scale is about 1.5 stops.
Actually, I wasn't really interested in any absolute numbers and units in the X axis. I'd simply like to know how many stops it translates to, in order to get an estimate of this film's latitude.
Not again!I’d bet it’s Agfa Aviphot Pan.
For what it's worth, Agfa-Gevaert offers Aviphot Pan only up to ISO 200I can't speak for 80s, but all my tests with Rollei IR 400 in Rodinal - I can barely sqeak 100ISO from that film, when using without filters or with deep red. For IR, the Rollei really needs a 680nm filter, and bracketing at 6, 12, 25 and 50 ISO has worked best for me. (I don't do much full-on IR so I've not gotten a good enough feel to use fewer brackets with it).
Compare the technical specs for Adox HR-50 with the data sheet for Aviphot Pan 80. Take a close look at the matching valleys in the characteristic curve at 500, 550 and 640 nm, and also compare the specs for max resolution at 1:1000 contrast of 280 lp/mm vs. 287 lp/mm. Since the toe of the Adox product, while very flat, extends far to the left of the Pan 80 toe, I predict vast pushing potential with this film. One thing, which is strange, is HR-50's shoulder at D=1.5, which is not reflected by Pan 80, but this may be due to the different developers being used.I’d bet it’s Agfa Aviphot Pan.
So this is Rollei Retro 80s but even in the custom-made Adox developer it now only delivers ISO 50 or is this the real speed of Rollei Retro and the 80 is an exaggeration or does 80 refer to something else?
I am a bit puzzled
pentaxuser
-) The film speed does not change with the height of the location of taking.this aerial speed v sea level speed is completely new to me.
Thanks faberryman for the great news.Adox is out with a new ISO 50 film.
https://www.adox.de/Photo/adox-hr-50-en/
That's the point.I hope it is not overpriced .
I only meant to explain why I thought the horizontal scale is 1.Bill Burk, I completely failed to follow your response( my fault due to lack of knowledge and not yours in your response). I think you were clearing up a technical point which may or may not make a real practical difference in the film's behaviour compared to Rollei Retro 80s but again if you could simplify what you found I'd be grateful
Thanks
pentaxuser
I have no experience with Rollei Retro 80s nor with this new Adox film, but my impression is that the Rollei product is straight Agfa Aviphot Pan 80, whereas for the Adox product they preflash the film before packaging. If I read these two reviews, the motivation for preflashing appears clear: in its original form Pan 80 has a sharp toe and high contrast, and therefore won't handle underexposure gracefully. The author of the review PDF still recommends it at EI160 with HC-110, a developer not exactly known for giving films high speed.My conclusion so far, based on various responses, is that this Adox film may not be different enough from Rollei Retro 80s to make much of a difference for the user so price might well be the deciding factor and yet both Rudeofus and Bill Burk have given us ( well me at least) quite technical responses which might suggest otherwise.
Agfa-Gavaert still manufacture Aviphot and other B&W films, as clearly stated on their website.
I think it's 0,5 LogE. If you look at the straight part of the characteristic curve, it gets from about 0,5 to 0,9 density in one division. By your reasoning, that would be a "local" gamma of about 0,4, certainly low contrast that needs no taming. IMHO, it's 0,5 per division and this is a short exposure latitude film. It gets better with whatever treatment it takes, but it still looks rather limited.I think the scale is units of LogE, as in ... each line is 1.0
I don’t think that it is 0.5 because I often study film over 3.0 units’ of exposure and I rarely see the shoulder (because most step wedges are 3.0). I aim to have the toe on the far left of my graphs, and a little over 3.0 across the x-axis fills my graph page.
If the scale were 0.5 LogE then six lines would cover 3.0 and, as I see, you would go from toe to shoulder. It’s not 0.5
In the comments section of and Adox post on Facebook they say that the material they modify is from ongoing production and what they have at the moment is less than six weeks old.
It seems I wasn't clear in my previous post. What I meant was that if, as I suspect, every division is equal to 0,5, then it is a high contrast film. If it wasn't a high contrast film, then it wouldn't need special treatment by Adox. Hope it becomes clearer now....
Bill, a pity about the disagreement about short or long exposure film between you and Anon Ymous. I note that he says that if you are right then he concludes, as does Rudeofus, that this is low contrast film...
It seems I wasn't clear in my previous post. What I meant was that if, as I suspect, every division is equal to 0,5, then it is a high contrast film. If it wasn't a high contrast film, then it wouldn't need special treatment by Adox. Hope it becomes clearer now.
Right we are working ourselves upwards on the ISO scaleAnd in the 20 ASA range you already got that high-resolution fine/no-grain film/developer combo CMS 20 /Adotech.
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?