What makes Acros "boring".

[GarageBoy]

How's Acros in D76 Stock or 1:1?

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

How's Acros in D76 Stock or 1:1?

My last example above (near Pt Bonito, it's Rodeo Beach at night, that's about a 5 minute exposure) is in D-76. Might give you some idea but heck I use Rodinal, HC-110, D-76 and others and they all work well.

 

[marciofs]

I used to shoot with across in studio and I liked it. I used to shoot landscapes too but with controlled light in studio it is better. But I changed it for Delta 100 because I couldn't get as deep blacks with across as I can with Delta 100. And I like more the graduation on tonalities in Delta 100.

 

[Axle]

acros ... it was made for caffenol c

YES!

 

[Whiteymorange]

every film is boring ...
acros ... it was made for caffenol c

John, be honest...was there ever a film you didn't see as made for Caffenol C?

 

[mauro35]

D76 1+1 is good too. Well, honestly I don't really know if there is a film which does not respond well to D76. But Rodinal is better, absolutely, for Acros. Here is an example for D76 1+1.

 

[DREW WILEY]

If there's anything boring about actual ACROS, it's gotta be the person behind the camera. It's a wonderful film prized by many, and I've shot it in everything from 35mm to 8x10.

 

[dynachrome]

I like it in Fuji Microfine.

 

[Roger Cole]

If it is orthopanchromatic, how do you use yellow or orange filters?

You go ahead and use them, just bear in mind they will have a somewhat stronger effect than they do on normal panchromatic films. It isn't "red blind" it's just a bit less red sensitive.

I like Acros a lot. In my view it's anything but "boring" and in fact may be the least boring film on the market, aside from maybe D3200. That is, it's different - different spectral response, different curve, different (almost nonexistent) reciprocity failure curve.

FP4+ is my standard medium speed film but I do like Acros. They are very different. Neither is boring unless YOU are boring.

 

[dasBlute]

I love it in rodinal, but don't seem to get out enough at night to use it,
where it really 'shines'

https://www.flickr.com/photos/stormiticus/tags/acros/

-Tim

 

[destroya]

love acros. bought 300 feet from a fellow board member three weeks ago and have burned through 100 already. love it in pyro-HD and XTOL replenished.

just bummed about the price increase over the last year or so. A great film, like all films!

 

[marcmarc]

A nice film that I used to shoot quite a lot of until the prices went up. I used Rodinal 1+100 at 12 minutes and got nice results. I'm a bit confused though...is Acros a T-grain film? I've read that it's a "hybrid" which I took to mean that it was some flat T-grains as well as traditional clumpy grain.

 

[Xmas]

I bought 80 rolls of it when Freestyle cleared it out under the Legacy brand, but have only shot a few rolls of it and can't print it yet(fractured knee). I know this can be subjective, but I've read a few times on APUG that it's "boring" & "clinical". What makes it so?

hope your knee is completely better soon so you can shoot and print your stash.

 

[StoneNYC]

John, be honest...was there ever a film you didn't see as made for Caffenol C?

*snicker*

 

[StoneNYC]

Also, to the OP... I'm not sure who is telling you this but I think it's one of the most interesting films, the look is unique and amazing, personally if it were cheaper in sheet film, I would probably only shoot Acros100!

 

[Nuff]

I like it in Fuji Microfine.

Same here, pity they only sell it in Japan.

 

[TheToadMen]

John, be honest...was there ever a film you didn't see as made for Caffenol C?

Fuji Provia 100F and Agfa Scala

About the original question of the OP: after reading all the threads here my answer is: only the photograher himself and an art-critic.
But using the right combination of camera, negatve and print might help. Could be a nice subject for some books to write.
Wait ... Ansel beat me to it .....

Bert from Holland
http://thetoadmen.blogspot.nl

 

[Archimedes the Dog]

I find it a less "dramatic" t-grain than Tmax and Delta, but I like the subtlety of its midtones.

 

[Jaf-Photo]

For me, there are three reasons for using film.

(1) I like the tactile handling of film and film cameras.

(2) I like the fact that film is a physical representation of a physical reality

(3) I like the fact that film is a slightly 'off' representation of reality, which infuses the image with a sujective quality, a bit like a painting.

T-grain fims tend to be more acccurate in their reproduction of reality, so you lose a bit of the subjective aesthetic. Therefore, I feel that rather than shoot a lot of T-grain, I could use digital to save myself time and money.

But that said, I have seen a lot of great work with T-grain films. It's just not something I'm willing to invest a lot of time and money into achieving.

 

[chip j]

If I can't "transcend" reality, there's no point in photographing it, with T-grain or not.

 

[Jaf-Photo]

If I can't "transcend" reality, there's no point in photographing it, with T-grain or not.

Well, there is a case for documentary photoraphy as well.

 

[DREW WILEY]

There's nothing either more or less "realistic" about T-grain films. Anything black and white is an abstraction of the world which exists for normal human vision in color. But otherwise, the usual suspects of panchromatic vs orthopan vs ortho vs blue are what they've always been. Contrast and tonality are determined mainly by development and printing, regardless. Lots of flavors in either camp. I can make prints all day long where
even another very skilled photographer wouldn't be able to decipher whether they were T-grain or not.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I can make prints all day long where even another very skilled photographer wouldn't be able to decipher whether they were T-grain or not.

This has been my experience also.

 

[Jaf-Photo]

This has been my experience also.

It depends. If you make fairly straight prints, then many photographers would probably recognise the most common films.

Recently, my father showed me some old prints from my childhood, and I spotted theTri-X straight away. I am sure I would have spotted T-MAX too, had it been around

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

It depends. If you make fairly straight prints, then many photographers would probably recognise the most common films.

Recently, my father showed me some old prints from my childhood, and I spotted theTri-X straight away. I am sure I would have spotted T-MAX too, had it been around

Why does it matter whether prints are straight or not?