• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Testing and evaluating CatLabs "X Film 320 Pro (2022 version)


That tells more about you than about the posts you seem to be targeting.
 
albireo said:
None of this stuff would even remotely get through the editor of (let alone be considered for peer review by) the journal of South Surinamese and Peloponnesian Gender Studies.
Click to expand...

The thread is here, because we were looking for more information about the film, and somewhat surprisingly the supplier either didn't have it, or {self edited} didn't wish to share it. It is an attempt to meet a perceived need and satisfy some curiosity, in the face of an uncooperative film marketer.
aparat stepped forward and offered his/her explorations, which are more related to the sensitometry, and which are very informative, even though they may not be fully industry standard and to a peer review standard.
Dwight Anderson provided a bunch of interesting, "ring-around" exposure examples.
Alex Benjamin shared some nice photographic examples that appear to follow the recommendations that accompany the marketing of the film.
I'm looking forward to seeing some more examples that differ from what seem to many to be unusual development recommendations.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
BrianShaw said:
View attachment 319340
Click to expand...

Just a reminder Brian, if you don't like the technical testing, examples of your photos with the film are equally appreciated here. If you can, it would be nice to see some that aren't developed to the unusually high contrast that we have already seen. Some darkroom prints would be nice too.
 

The lower slope in the right third of this graph means the film is "self-compensating" (a term I just invented). That means to get compensation, you don't need to use Diafine; this film compresses highlights for you. That aspect of this film could be beneficial because the human eye is less sensitive to shadow contrast than highlights. Therefore, it's best to have more contrast in the shadows, as that curve portrays. If that curve retains its shape when the film is not overdeveloped, I'll be tempted to buy some.
 

It was for levity sake. Perhaps you will look at it again and share a chuckle. It’s a bit of a truism for almost everyone who has done testing, especially with impending deadline. Has nothing to do with liking or not liking technical testing.
 
Last edited:
BrianShaw said:
It was for levity sake.
Click to expand...

I thought it probably was. But we had at least one complaint, most likely because one can also take the "Errant Science" reference as criticism.
Irony is a dangerous thing here on the world wide web!
In any event, it was a good excuse to advocate for people who have some of this film to try some different things with it, and share the results.
 
Well whoever complained really doesn’t understand research testing or deadlines. Sad… no, pathetically thin-skinned.

No worries, I deleted it.

EDIT: For those who were offended, “Errant Science” is a comic strip name, a comic series that finds levity in situations faced by scientists and engineers. It has no more meaning than the title of any other comic series, like Dilbert or Far Side. There certainly wasn’t any implication on any effort that is being discussed in this thread…

And to the one or more who understood and enjoyed the levity… I’m happy to have made you smile.
 
Last edited:
BrianShaw said:
Well whoever complained really doesn’t understand research testing or deadlines. Sad… no, pathetically thin-skinned.

No worries, I deleted it.
Click to expand...

No Brian, it was the Errant Science name on it, not the contents of the graph. It was taken as an accusatory comment about the work shown in the thread. In short, it was misunderstood. All it really needed was an explanatory caption.
 
aparat said:
I agree. It's got a great mood, a sense of mystery.
Click to expand...

It is a "moody" film. Here's another example. Shows the range, but also the tendency to have blocked highlights, at least in XTOL (stock). Might work a bit better in D-23.

Info is on the neg, though, so a little burning in the darkroom would fix it.

CatLabs 320 Pro test #6

 
Some trivia here. X-Rite did make a serial to USB adapter for theDTP32 automatic reading densitometer. This is not the model I have, however, and I don't have this adapter.

 
aparat said:
..my sensitometer, densitometer, and thermometer are calibrated and certified,.. There's one button, that's it. You put the film in and you push the button.
Click to expand...

I looked back to see what equipment you are using, but in 2009 you posted you don't have a densitometer, so maybe you got your stuff recently? What are you using? New or refurbished?
 
albireo said:
None of this stuff would even remotely get through the editor of (let alone be considered for peer review by)
Click to expand...
The best part of this thread is practically a peer review of aparat's results. Aparat is very open to suggestions and we are greatful for the efforts, time and expenses he/she puts in these experiments. I would have no hesitation accepting results of this quality for publication if I were a reviewer.
 
  • Romanko
  • Deleted
  • Reason: don't belong in this thread
ic-racer said:
I looked back to see what equipment you are using, but in 2009 you posted you don't have a densitometer, so maybe you got your stuff recently? What are you using? New or refurbished?
Click to expand...

Thanks for all the cool info you've been posting here! It's amazing how huge this industry once was, and how much great technology was available. To be honest, I don't even remember exactly when I bought mine, it's an X-Rite 810. I bought it refurbished, maybe around 2012-2014, from an authorized medical device dealer in the US. Fortunately, it came with all the paperwork and accessories, including the calibration plaque and film. I have since sent it out for maintenance twice. Sadly, it looks like these models aren't going to be serviced any more. However, the 301 still is being serviced, as far as I know, but it's unclear for how much longer.
 

810 is very nice indeed! Your work on this film is very appreciated!
 
  • faberryman
  • Deleted
  • Reason: belongs in the other thread
Alex Benjamin said:
tendency to have blocked highlights, at least in XTOL (stock). Might work a bit better in D-23.

Info is on the neg, though, so a little burning in the darkroom would fix it.
Click to expand...

I'd guess cutting development by 10% would also be a step in the right direction -- and if you stick with Xtol, you don't give up 2/3 stop in the shadows.
 
  • MattKing
  • Deleted
  • Reason: don't belong in this thread
Donald Qualls said:
I'd guess cutting development by 10% would also be a step in the right direction -- and if you stick with Xtol, you don't give up 2/3 stop in the shadows.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the advice. The slight loss of speed of D-23 would indeed cause different problems.

If one wants to work with this film, one has to accept that sacrifices will have to be made. Question is which ones one is willing to make.
 
Alex Benjamin said:
If one wants to work with this film, one has to accept that sacrifices will have to be made. Question is which ones one is willing to make.
Click to expand...

This is true for any film -- buy Kodak or Ilford film in this speed range and your sacrifice will be money. Fomapan, your sacrifice is true film speed. Shanghai, it's never knowing if you'll "win the lottery" and get a batch of film that was confectioned wrong (poorly assembled 220, 127 taped and rolled from the wrong end of the backing, emulsion defects/handling damage). The question at this point is what your sacrifice will be with the Catlabs X-film 320.

From what I've seen so far, I'm really looking forward to shooting and processing the ten rolls of 120 I bought. Surely no worse than Fomapan (which is my go-to for black and white) and even more reasonably priced. I wonder if they'll offer the 35 mm in bulk rolls?
 
  • faberryman
  • Deleted
  • Reason: don't belong in this thread
  • faberryman
  • Deleted
  • Reason: don't belong in this thread
  • MattKing
  • Deleted
  • Reason: don't belong in this thread
I've deleted a bunch of Sal's posts here, along with some responses thereto. because they are more about CatLabs marketing than the film itself. We already have another thread on that subject.
If Sal or anyone else would like those posts to be restored and then moved to the other thread, just ask and I'll be happy to do so.
And yes, I know that at least some of the comments deleted were in response to a grumpy comment from me, and I'm trying to figure out how best to edit that part out without rendering the balance nonsensical.
 
If the deleted posts don't belong in this thread, perhaps you could just move them to the other thread. Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register