What's special about two-emulsion (not x-ray) films?

MTGseattle said:

@Bill Burk do you have that above picture mounted in an old window sash?

Click to expand...

Yes. I got it at a second-hand shop in San Luis Obispo. Honest, I did not scavenge it from the site. I used to use the glass for contact printing in the old days. It was that old kind of glass with an uneven wavy texture. I used to take it out and put it back all the time. Too lazy to get framer’s points I just stick old X-Acto blades in the back to hold it together. Somewhere along the line I misplaced the glass. I don’t think it ever broke, just disappeared. I could replace it in a minute, but nobody likes it with glass over the print.

The warehouse is in San Simeon. I am sure lots of people have taken pictures of the same building. Camera was a Kodak 35 - this was when my dad wouldn’t let me use the Spotmatic II and my only other camera, a Kalimar (Zenit) had stopped working (tampered).

Bill, 11-12 stop ranges of illumination are quite common for me. A foggy 4-5 setting deep in the redwoods can easily become 11 stops once the fog lifts and you've got extremes of direct sunlight and shadow. At high altitude, being able to cleanly separate glittering specular highlights from general snow or glacial ice brightness, on the upper end, while retaining excellent deep shadow gradation in pitted dark volcanic rock, for example, at the opposite extreme, is a tricky request for even TMax films. But Bergger 200 and Super XX 200 handled it well.

Of course, the Zonies are just going to tell you to seriously "minus" develop whatever film instead; but they risk turning the whole thing blaaah that way.

I’ve never N-2’d anything in fact that cliff hanger convinced me that Subject Luminance Range can be deceiving.

So a long straight line is a good thing and double emulsion films give you that. And most films are (at least) that.

Pan F has the shortest straight line of any of the current choices, basically an exaggerated S-curve. It works nice in about the same luminance range as chrome slide film can handle. I usually tell beginners to start out with FP4, and so does the local camera store.

I think Double-X 5222 might have a short shoulder

First of all, Bill, we're talking about two different things. Super XX was never called Double X, and the correct number is 4142, and it had an exceptionally long straight line which didn't shoulder off soon at all. In fact, it's the film older step tablets were made on, since it gave crisp separations way way up there, even in densities so high they're generally unusable for typical printing applications. Super XX was discontinued long ago, although other products like Bergger/Lotus 200 tried to extenuate the application awhile longer.

You're apparently confusing this with Eastman 5222 MOVIE film, which perhaps a few shooters have adapted for still usage; but it was was never engineered for still applications per se, or as any kind of substitute for Super XX. What deliberately replaced Super XX to some extent were TMax films.

I have some Super-XX but the fog is so bad that even with cold development I can only get an exposure index of 2-3

Certainly not 200

I haven’t checked how far up it can go to see if it can still serve any purpose. But it’s not pretty.

But yes, Double-X the movie film 5222 creates pleasing pictures with about the graininess of TMY2 but without the subjectively choppy look. The grain is pleasant.

@RoboRepublic got me a bulk roll of it and I am using it for the kind of pictures where I would have reached for TMY2.

I only have two concerns: lack of frame numbering means I will need to be careful cutting and filing. And the early shoulder which means “all those things” that I won’t be able to do when I could rely on a long straight line.

I’m pairing Panatomic-X for fine grain and Double-X 5222 for high speed, and I might spool up some Plus-X while I am at it.

I know I can replace them anytime with TMAX100 and TMY2 but I don’t have to switch

Super-XX was real-world 200 speed for many applications. PETRIFIED Super-XX is a different story, especially if the expiration date requires Carbon 14 testing to confirm. This area has a number of alt movie film venues, with Double X popular for certain contrasty classic looks. "Chan is Missing" (1982) sparked a still-ongoing trend.