I've only got one camera capable of altering exposure by less than 1/3 stop, and that only in certain shutter speed ranges. I'm referring to my Speed Graphic; the focal plane shutter in its slower ranges is able to produce some pretty fine gradients in exposure time. Nothing else I own can divide a stop any finer than 1/3 stop, and most of my cameras only do half stops.
Thank you, Matt. Gotta love Photrio for the chance to learn something new every day. Does this picture show the Wood effect? I took it with a Hoya R72 filter at ISO 3.The Wood effect is named after Robert Williams Wood, and references the fact that a lot of foliage strongly reflects IR radiation.
Ilford SFX does have some sensitivity in the near infrared, so you can see some Wood effect with a 720nm filter. You won't see any with a #25 filter though, because that filter transmits too much visible light, which will overwhelm any results from the near IR radiation present.
The red #25 may lighten the look of the foliage though - perhaps that is what is meant by "pseudo Wood" effect.
Does this picture show the Wood effect? I took it with a Hoya R72 filter at ISO 3.
can you read the aperture scale accurately enough
The accuracy of a leaf shutter at high speed would be way less than 1/4 of a stop. For all practical purposes 1/3 of a stop is within the uncertainty of your exposure metering/exposure/developing/printing procedures. I have no information about the differences in speed between batches of the same film. It was a problem decades ago which I assume was resolved. There are additional factors like film storage time/conditions and time between exposure and developing.There are some leaf shutters with stepless speed setting
If you are desperate you can use Waterhouse stops in some ancient lens - as accurate as you can machine/measure it.
I have to share this one. It's Buster, our neighborhood cat. He lives around here. He stays with a family for a week, then moves on to the next, and on to the next after that.
View attachment 323024
Looks really good. This film gives great results, it's a shame that Catlabs had to market it as an 'edgy' street film that can be pushed etc. Instead of what it actually does best.
$6.99 is a very good value IMO.
That is one comfortable cat! He's cool.Here's another of Buster the cat.
Here's another of Buster the cat. I can't help myself. He is so awesome.
This film is not for everything, but there are times when it works really well, as @Huss @Dwight Anderson , and others have shown.
View attachment 323109
Agree 100% . By the way, this cat photo comes from a negative I developed in XTOL for 7 minutes and it was overcooked, which is why it's a bit grainy looking. But it does have that unique look that this film is known for.
Here's another of Buster the cat. I can't help myself. He is so awesome.
This film is not for everything, but there are times when it works really well, as @Huss @Dwight Anderson , and others have shown.
View attachment 323109
Yes. Good point! I saw them fix up a fence the other day. I'll let them know about the stairs.The picture of the cat is great, but my concern is the cracked concrete step just above him. I'm in the concrete business and I would have that replaced.
This film is not for everything,
Speaking of XTOL-R, I might actually run the curve family test in XTOL to see if there's any change to the S-shape of the curves.
I have to share this one. It's Buster, our neighborhood cat. He lives around here. He stays with a family for a week, then moves on to the next, and on to the next after that.
View attachment 323024
@Craig That's really interesting. No, I haven't had a chance to compare Ilford Pan F to the CatLABS X FILM 320 Pro. Perhaps, at some point I might do that. I've been meaning to test the Pan F for some time.
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?