Digital BW, The Print

Dave, It is always possible that the thin film was a result of poor chemical
solution; bad mixing, bad package, etc. I have not seen or heard about it
but before I'd put it all on exposure, check and see if the film has edge
numbers. If they look bad, it doesn't look good for a properly processed
film.  

 

Eric Neilsen Photography

4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9

Dallas, TX 75226

214-827-8301

http://ericneilsenphotography.com

 

Skype : ejprinter

  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of David
Keenan
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2007 10:34 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: slightly OT: disappointment with Bluefire Police
film

 

Yes, there are some of us who prefer film.

I am struggling with the urge to sell both of my R-D1 cameras since the
compromises I am forced to make inhibit me compared my film rangefinder
counterparts...

But back to the original Bluefire film matter, I have placed a picture on my
PAW 2007 <http://www.david-
<http://www.david-keenan.com/displayimage.php?album=35&pos=0>
keenan.com/displayimage.php?album=35&pos=0> taken
with this film since I think the high contrast nature of the film suits it.

The clear base probably does affect my reading of the thinness of the film
but the histograms of many of the scans do indicate underexposure.

But it is the lack of midtones and contrast in midtones that are present
that will prevent me from ever using this film again. I understand that it
is the nature of the beast since it was not originally intended as a film
for pictorial use.

Dave.

--
Web Site: www.david-keenan.com
2007 PAW: www.david-keenan.com/paw
2006 EuroBlog: www.david-keenan.com/euroblog

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]