[pure-silver] Re: TMX AND RODINAL?

  • From: "Ralph W. Lambrecht" <info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:04:28 +0100

Dennis

Thanks for the tip. I think, I will repeat your test. Sounds like an interesting experiment and seems to verify that the emulsion and not the developer is the main factor for image quality.





Regards



Ralph W. Lambrecht

http://www.darkroomagic.com


This electronic message contains information that is confidential, legally privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. This information is intended for the use of the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, printing or any other use of, or any action in reliance on, the contents of this electronic message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and destroy the original message immediately.

P don't print this e-mail unless you really have to






On Dec 15, 2009, at 21:45, <dlp4777@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <dlp4777@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > wrote:


I actually found the three prints this morning. On the back of the prints is written Rodinal 1-100, Beutlers 1-1-10 and Xtol stock. The prints are on Oriental WT processed in D54 and the negs were shot with a late version 135 macro for the Pentax 67. My point in doing the test was to see if I could actually see the glowing whites I get from Rodinal if compared side by side with the others. The prints are actually so close that on first and second glance you don't see any difference at all. The differences between the 3 developers in my test is very insignificant. But I do see a bit more clear detail in the whites with the Rodinal than with the Beutlers which gets slightly more chalky looking. I can't actually say there is a difference in the whites between the Xtol and the Rodinal but there is greater shadow detail in both the Rodinal and the Beutlers than there is in Xtol... but it is very slight. I actually shot 3 rolls of film in the test so there is the variable of! the sun moving between the first and the third enough to change the contrast. But to me I proved that it doesn't really matter on Tmax 100 which of the three developers I use.

Dennis

Ralph W. Lambrecht wrote:

Dennis

Actually, I didn't doubt you at all. I just wanted to see your test
results, because I'm conducting a similar test along those lines right
now.





Regards



Ralph W. Lambrecht

http://www.darkroomagic.com


This electronic message contains information that is confidential,
legally privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. This
information is intended for the use of the addressee only. If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
disclosure, copying, distribution, printing or any other use of, or
any action in reliance on, the contents of this electronic message is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and destroy the original message immediately.

P don't print this e-mail unless you really have to






On Dec 15, 2009, at 17:07, Dennis Purdy wrote:

You are probably doubting my credibility Ralph and I would say that
anyone making any claim is possibly spouting off for the pleasure of
it or creating their own personal mythology.  My situation is that I
have been doing custom lab work for 25 years now and I still process
film all the time though now I try to keep it to film day which is
Monday.  Because I am constantly doing it I can easily run various
tests and throw them in with my work flow.  I do this partly out of
boredom but mostly out of a desire to know things,  or sometimes
just a desire to shoot some film around the house where my lab is.

What usually happens with my test film is that it sits by the light
table and the densitometer un cut or partly cut until I get tired of
looking at it and tired of the mess and I throw it out.  Some stuff
I keep if it is especially interesting to me, like comparisons
between lenses and cameras or paper types with developers.

I actually printed the test I referred to with the Tmax 100 in
various developers and those prints lay on my print rack for months
until in a frustrated moment of cleaning the chaotic lab up I must
have thrown them out as well because I just looked in several boxes
and they aren't there.

I can describe the scene I shot with that if that helps.  I shot
sunlight coming through the window onto a vase full of water with
very dark cut bamboo in it.  I was studying the detail in the bamboo
and the surrounding dark room as well as the highlight detail where
the sun hit the bamboo and where the sun hit the glass vase.  And I
not only shot the test with my Rolleiflex 2.8FX, but I shot it as
well with my Pentax 67. I am a testing idiot.

But after looking just now I can't find that film or prints.  You
want me to do the test again?  You want me to go around with a
digital camera and show the piles of stuff I have to sort through?
Dennis Purdy
On Dec 15, 2009, at 07:39, Ralph W. Lambrecht wrote:

Dennis

I would be interested to see this side-by-side comparison. Are
those prints still available?





Regards



Ralph W. Lambrecht



= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ====================================================================== To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.

Other related posts: