Thanks. So can I take it that they are not the same films now? When I say the same I mean the same as the current TMY2. It is the latter that I am comparing it to in terms of TMax 400 and its current price
pentaxuser
Thanks. So can I take it that they are not the same films now? When I say the same I mean the same as the current TMY2. It is the latter that I am comparing it to in terms of TMax 400 and its current priceIt used to be the same film. This was widely known.
And some people still shoot entire weddings on medium format film. Or record direct to tape.
There's always someone.
The chap who designed the Red Bull F1 car which just took Max Verstappen to the World Championship does not use computers and still uses pen, paper and easel. There's always one. And sometimes they are the very best.
It remains possible that Shanghai films do not need to be "cost effective" in the way we understand from a Western perspective. And that specifically photographing weddings on film is a selling point for which people are willing to pay a premium. Mind you, making minor adjustments to 60 or so film shots may take less time than sifting through and editing 2000 digital shots of the same event.
About 15 years ago I had the good fortune to be a guest at a celebrity wedding in Boston. I shot mostly on film, as I had no decent digital camera at the time....including Konica 1600ASA C41 film in medium format on my Kiev 6 and Ilford Delta 3200 in my Praktica BX20S. The official photographer had 2 DLSRs which cost a fortune there. Bride and groom preferred my medium format and B&W photos because they looked totally different to everything the pro and the other guests shot. Some people might just be prepared to more for hiring a film photographer.
My 5 rolls of 220 showed up. Will test in my GW690III shortly.
My 5 rolls of 220 showed up. Will test in my GW690III shortly.
My 5 rolls of 220 showed up. Will test in my GW690III shortly.
Are you gonna nuke them in monobath for us?
I look forward to see how the 220 film works and how your GW690III does.
But of course! The 400 220 film that I previously used from Shanghai actually gave really good results with the monobath. All the issues were unrelated to developing/developer but due to quality control- scratches, uneven emulsion coating.
First impression - this film smells like mothballs just like the GPX400 220 did. If that matters.
I will also test it in my Hasselblad H1.
Auer,
Thanks for posting those, that's a very fair test....wide range of tones, well captured.
Those are some very encouraging results.
Nice images, too, BTW!
Auer,
Well done! I really like these. This GP3 looks like a very neutral and clean film from these examples. And I like your subject matter: nice urban grunge. I think I will order some for my big Fuji GW690II.
Auer, I too like the results. Just curious, you mentioned straight scans from V600. What software and did you use the auto setting? I use Vuescan with auto most of the time with b&w. I like the results.
Auer,
My Hasselblad A24's have been starving and I am hesitant to feed them with my frozen TXP HP5+ and PXP.
Shanghai I have in 4x5 5x7 and 8x10, as well as 120. So far no quality issues; an old school film. I loaded up when they were shutting it down. I'm thinking D23 1:3 on a Unicolor Uniroller
Pentax 645N | SMC Pentax-FA 645 80-160mm ƒ4.5 | Shanghai GP3 Pan 100 220 | Kodak HC110 1:31 "B" | CS F96
I cobbled up a quick gallery https://eauer.myportfolio.com/
Mechanically all seems ok, no major issues I can spot.
These are straight from a Epson V600, no post.
I was going to leave out all the blurry shots but left them in all the same. I cant handhold the 645N at below 1/10 much.
Heavy overcast so low shutter speeds, I basically took the 645N out for a quick walk and just used it as a P&S.
I'll make more of an effort on the next roll, I got two to evaluate and they arrived yesterday.
D76 Stock 7 minsI'm going to shoot the first 220 roll during the coming days.
This reminds me that I don't know how to develop the film. My standard developer is ID-11. I haven't found dev times for ID-11 or D-76 (or any dev times) on the "official" page where I bought the film.
"GP3 Official Account", do you have official recommendations?
Here's a suggestion The new "Ilford" is now run by a company called Pemberstone and while the facts stated by the former executive as to the state of the Ilford machinery will remain as they were, it may be that the new company may take a different position from the former board of directors of what was then Harman Technology. So make an inquiry of the current company via the IlfordPhoto website and let us know how it goes
If you don't mind a suggestion a simple inquiry is the best. I'd avoid using words like hooey or in any other way appearing adversarial. It is after all a different company
Neither do I think it is as simple as suggesting to them that they have merely to turn the on/off switch to the on position so personally I'd avoid this in the inquiry as your easy solution. It tends to relegate Ilford to being a little "simple-minded" IMO so not a good start
Best of luck
pentaxuser
HiI bought and have just received a few rolls of the current round of Shanghai 220 film. The first roll I loaded into my Rolleiflex (which had the 220 modification) jammed. After extracting and examining the roll it was apparent the leader is poorly attached to the film with a bit of masking tape about a half an inch in from the edge of the leader. Because of how and where it's attached the edge of the leader sticks up and jams into the roller, making it impossible to completely load.
I guess I'll have to open these rolls in a darkroom and tape them down properly. So much for quality control. I probably should've just stuck with 120 from Kodak or Ilford.
we are still improving our 220 film, hope we can do better and better. but during this period, we may still have some problems happen or found from customer. So hope we can solve all tasks soon.Is Shanghai state owned? If it is, it would seem that currently it may be operating its 220 production on a shoe-string from evidence in #205. It would look as if the speculation that it was a old lady "knife and forking it " in the dark may not be far from the truth. A largely "hand-made" 220 can be fine but it relies on the kind of consistency than often fails when it has to be maintained for roll after roll. Even at relatively low levels of production the problem may be that demand isn't high enough for much if any investment in mechanisation to be profitable but a little too high for consistent "knife and forking" methods to work in a faultless way, so faults of some kind may have to be expected.
pentaxuser
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?