I'll bet it was Universal Format, too! Minox to 8x10.....
Say, what was the agitation process you used with that water?
New Arista Premium 100 & 400 films
-
A
- Thread starter Paul Verizzo
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Transposing Frames for stereo photography, 45x107mm ("châssis alterneur")
- Started by Manual Camera
-
For Sale Transposing Frames for stereo photography, 6x13cm ("châssis alterneur")
- Started by Manual Camera
-
For Sale Transposing Frames for stereo photography, 7x16cm and 7x17cm ("châssis alterneur")
- Started by Manual Camera
-
For Sale Antique Mackenstein 6.5x9cm contact printing frame (France)
- Started by Manual Camera
Forum statistics
I'll bet it was Universal Format, too! Minox to 8x10.....
Say, what was the agitation process you used with that water?
film
Just about 5 minutes while I was washing my dishes. and the agitaion was taking out or adding dishes. Left them clean and sparkeley
Apparently there is a delay in the 400 speed rolls. The site now says "This item is currently out of stock.
Item overdue from vendor - Please call for more information." The 100 speed rolls are in and both speeds available in bulk.
Item overdue from vendor - Please call for more information." The 100 speed rolls are in and both speeds available in bulk.
That wouldn't be about the exact same results as Tri-X, would it? :rolleyes:
I will be posting photos from the Arista Pro 100 this evening. So far, looks good!
~Steve Sloan
~Steve Sloan
I was being facetious...
Hence, the :rolleyes: I think the advance users of the 400 film pretty well determined that it must be Tri-X.
Now, for the envelope, please, on the "100" speed Arista.
Hence, the :rolleyes: I think the advance users of the 400 film pretty well determined that it must be Tri-X.
Now, for the envelope, please, on the "100" speed Arista.
I have posted many photos using Arista Premium 400 on my Flickr pages here. These are mostly family photos and are unmanipulated scans from my local lab.
All are shot at 400 with Nikon FE2 and FM2's shot either with a 35mm 2.8 or a 75-150mm series E zoom. These are developed in Photographer's Formulary TD16 the equivalent of D-76H:
http://tinyurl.com/sloan-ap400
~Steve
All are shot at 400 with Nikon FE2 and FM2's shot either with a 35mm 2.8 or a 75-150mm series E zoom. These are developed in Photographer's Formulary TD16 the equivalent of D-76H:
http://tinyurl.com/sloan-ap400
~Steve
Last edited by a moderator:
Anyone tried it in DDX?
The Freestyle development chart gives 6.5min for Ilford DDX 1+4, 20C for the Arista Premium 400. I believe Ilford gives a time of 8 min for DDX 1+4, 20C for Tri-X.
Is this possibly just a typo or the Arista Premium 400 is not exactly Tri-X?
The Freestyle development chart gives 6.5min for Ilford DDX 1+4, 20C for the Arista Premium 400. I believe Ilford gives a time of 8 min for DDX 1+4, 20C for Tri-X.
Is this possibly just a typo or the Arista Premium 400 is not exactly Tri-X?
My bet is plain old human error. Possibly "further experiments," but not likely. I really doubt if FS went through every 400 Premium film with every developer and ran their own tests.
Remember the recent conversation on the formula for ID-78??, the warmtone version of 62? An error many years ago still gets handed down as fact.
Thanks Paul. I pointed the error to Freestyle and was told to "test." I guess the DDX times kind of puzzled them.
Coincidentally, the 6.5 min given by Freestyle is very close to the time for Tri-X in Clayton F76+ (which many claim to be very similar to DDX)
Coincidentally, the 6.5 min given by Freestyle is very close to the time for Tri-X in Clayton F76+ (which many claim to be very similar to DDX)
Howz it going, Steve? Not to put pressure on you or anything.....
The big question I think we all have, is do you think it is Plus-X? I have no doubt that the film is "good." Heck, even the Chinese films can make a decent image these days. Maybe not the best in critical analysis, but usable.
I have a cart at FS ready to sumit. The amount of the 100 Premium will partly depend on your thoughts.
Thanks!
Another possibility is that Kodak (if they supplied times to Freestyle) and Ilford disagree on the time required for this combination. Such differences do happen. Do you happen to have Kodak's suggested time for Tir-X in DDX 1+4 available? If it matches Freestyle's time for Premium 400, then that's the answer.
Frankly, I wouldn't pay much attention to non-Kodak developers, unless D-76 based. Even there, ID-11 has different times, I presume due to different agitation suggestions.
AFAIK, all the Kodak developers are a perfect match to Plus-X and Tri-X.
Hmmm.....
I stay with DDX as I feel very comfortable with it with the films I use most (Delta 3200 and Tri-X). I am a beginner, so I try to limit the number of films and developer I use. However, I love a good bargain and this Arista Premium sure is, assuming it behaves exactly like Tri-X. I just ordered 20 rolls of the Arista Premium to test for myself.
EDIT: Just checked Freestyle's development time for Tri-X using DD-X and it also says 6.5min -- meaning the "error" is the same for both Tri-X and Arista Premium
EDIT: Just checked Freestyle's development time for Tri-X using DD-X and it also says 6.5min -- meaning the "error" is the same for both Tri-X and Arista Premium
Last edited by a moderator:
Arista 100 Images!
Here, in this tag set on Flickr, are my first test shots with Arista Premium 100. I found it to have a long scale and held detail in the shadows and highlights. Grain is good, it is only visible in areas of constant tonality like the sky. I like the tonal scale. Not bad for a 100 speed film. The film base was pretty clear with no color cast. This is shot at 100 and developed in Photographer's Formulary TD16 (Basically D76H) and fixed in Illford Fixer Concentrate. I bought 100 ft of the film and I am pretty happy with it. Unlike the Arista400 scans I posted earlier, I did boost the contrast of these a bit in Camera RAW. The straight scans were flatter. These were shot on August 8, 2008 at San Jose State University. I have NOT conventional printed any of these yet:
http://tinyurl.com/sloan-ap100
Here is the ap100 set:
http://tinyurl.com/sloan-ap100set
~Steve Sloan
Here, in this tag set on Flickr, are my first test shots with Arista Premium 100. I found it to have a long scale and held detail in the shadows and highlights. Grain is good, it is only visible in areas of constant tonality like the sky. I like the tonal scale. Not bad for a 100 speed film. The film base was pretty clear with no color cast. This is shot at 100 and developed in Photographer's Formulary TD16 (Basically D76H) and fixed in Illford Fixer Concentrate. I bought 100 ft of the film and I am pretty happy with it. Unlike the Arista400 scans I posted earlier, I did boost the contrast of these a bit in Camera RAW. The straight scans were flatter. These were shot on August 8, 2008 at San Jose State University. I have NOT conventional printed any of these yet:
http://tinyurl.com/sloan-ap100
Here is the ap100 set:
http://tinyurl.com/sloan-ap100set
~Steve Sloan
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2004
- Messages
- 2,413
- Format
- Multi Format
Steve, thanks. In your opinion, who makes the stuff?
Or, more pertinently, do you think it is Plus-X?
Remember, you asked me to guess...
I am guessing it is Plus-X. If it isn't Kodak and isn't Plus-X I do not know who would or could be making the film in the USA or why Kodak would be making other films for Freestyle that behave enough like Plus-X and Tri-X to be confused as them.
The important point to me is that both of these films seem like good films for what I do. They have a tonal scale and a grain structure I like at a very low price point. Anything else is just conjecture. If you want my conjecture, here it is; maybe Kodak just wants to to keep the film making machines rolling and need a certain volume of sales to do that, even if that means less profit per roll. Maybe it is a way to test demand? Maybe it is supply and demand, they are testing if they lower the price maybe that will stimulate demand? They might be priming the pump.
If they can't sell film at this price point, what is the point of making it? My guess, highlight the word GUESS, is that at a certain point the volume equation has to intersect the cost of keeping the manufacturing equipment running. Then some hard (especially for us) business decisions will have to be made. Hey I have been shooting a lot (for me) of b&w since this stuff has come out, but nothing like the volume of film I used to shoot when I was doing it for a living.
But, don't let me be a gloomy Gus, after all they still make and sell Super-8 movie film. We think we are a niche market?
~Steve Sloan
I am guessing it is Plus-X. If it isn't Kodak and isn't Plus-X I do not know who would or could be making the film in the USA or why Kodak would be making other films for Freestyle that behave enough like Plus-X and Tri-X to be confused as them.
The important point to me is that both of these films seem like good films for what I do. They have a tonal scale and a grain structure I like at a very low price point. Anything else is just conjecture. If you want my conjecture, here it is; maybe Kodak just wants to to keep the film making machines rolling and need a certain volume of sales to do that, even if that means less profit per roll. Maybe it is a way to test demand? Maybe it is supply and demand, they are testing if they lower the price maybe that will stimulate demand? They might be priming the pump.
If they can't sell film at this price point, what is the point of making it? My guess, highlight the word GUESS, is that at a certain point the volume equation has to intersect the cost of keeping the manufacturing equipment running. Then some hard (especially for us) business decisions will have to be made. Hey I have been shooting a lot (for me) of b&w since this stuff has come out, but nothing like the volume of film I used to shoot when I was doing it for a living.
But, don't let me be a gloomy Gus, after all they still make and sell Super-8 movie film. We think we are a niche market?
~Steve Sloan
Very, very much appreciated Steve!
You don't have any Diafine, do you? What I'm thinking is that Plus and Tri get such a speed bump in DF that if the results are the same, that would clinch the arguement of the "real" name of these films.
Off to FS to order......
You don't have any Diafine, do you? What I'm thinking is that Plus and Tri get such a speed bump in DF that if the results are the same, that would clinch the arguement of the "real" name of these films.
Off to FS to order......
Was that a 442 in the shot ?? Thanks for the test show. Looks like a film that could grow on a person. I have a long rl of 400 on the way. looking forward to it.
It was an Olds Cutlass, that's all I know. I am glad you liked the photos. I have bought 100ft of the AP100 and 2x100 of the AP400 and plan to buy much more. Oh yea, I am shooting a lot more b&w now. My son and grandkids came to wisit and I used my D2Hs only one day. I used to be a newspaper photog back in the day. Now I mostly shoot friends and family. Theirs are the lives I want to chronicle.
When we were in San Francisco several people commented on my using an "old" film camera (a 35mm Nikon FE2.) One guy said, "wow, that's old school."
You got it!
I am having fun:
~Steve
PS - Oh, sorry, I have no Diafine. I was thinking about getting some as I shot some AP400 at 1600 today.
When we were in San Francisco several people commented on my using an "old" film camera (a 35mm Nikon FE2.) One guy said, "wow, that's old school."
You got it!
I am having fun:
~Steve
PS - Oh, sorry, I have no Diafine. I was thinking about getting some as I shot some AP400 at 1600 today.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ya the 442 was a refined version of the Cutlass. I have 5 developers that they list time for. I going to be brave (or foolish) and try them all out. 1st one is going to be D-76 ( stick with Kodak) Should be a good starting point. I just love the excitement a child has when they first see a print being developed.
Last edited by a moderator:
Steve, thanks for posting your tests of the new Arista films. They sound promising. I'm about to start exploring the new Tmax 400, but once I've used up my supply of that I may look into AP 400. Your FE2 must be the same vintage as my "new" Bronica 6x6!
Jon Porter
Silicon Valley Silver Shooters
Jon Porter
Silicon Valley Silver Shooters
| 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:  |