Acros Neopan 100

[LeicaBraz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Bought a couple of rolls which will try next week. Any particular comments or recommendations? (I do not develop myself).

Thanks

[Stealth3kpl]

Acros Neopan 100 = Legacy Pro 100. I found it to be fine at box speed in Ilfosol3.

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/film-forum/158624-film-thread.html#post1564945

 

Pete

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[timd.]

Any particular comments or recommendations? (I do not develop myself).

 

excuse me, i don't understand. if you don't develop yourself - what recommendations do you need?

[Caterman]

My first recommendation would be start developing my second would be get some Diafine and shoot at 200 iso

[Xmas]

Hi

 

Ignore pert advice.

Use a good lab.

 

Noel

[ola.fiske]

I can not agree more. Acros @ 160-200 and Diafine is a match made in heaven:)

 

Ola Fiske

[Stealth3kpl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My first recommendation would be start developing my second would be get some Diafine and shoot at 200 iso

 

I can not agree more. Acros @ 160-200 and Diafine is a match made in heaven:)

 

Ola Fiske

 

 

This is very interesting. I'm used to seeing people recommend over-exposing film. What effect does this under-exposure and diafine development bring?

Pete

[Caterman]

This is very interesting. I'm used to seeing people recommend over-exposing film. What effect does this under-exposure and diafine development bring?

Pete

 

With Diafine it gives all films an extra stop or two. With Tri-x 400 best result I have got is when pushed to 1600 nice contrast but not too much for scanning I have tried a few rolls at 1250 as an experiment not as punchy as I would like. I have always assumed pushing a film effectively meant you were under exposing ie for a given aperture it would give faster shutter speed therefore less exposure and better low light performance Diafine is some sort of self compensation developer not blowing high lights and keeping detail in shadows it gives you quite a bit more tolerance on exposure

[Guest Holy Moly]

Diafine is a 2-bath developer. The different baths provide a smooth and not so hard tonal range and less grain compare to some other standard developers. Second benefit is the easy scanning, even with LED driven Nikon Coolscan V and 5000. These scanners are well known for pronouncing grain compare to 'soft light' scanners as Minolta 5400.

 

High noon pic from Nantes in very strong light:

 

Eléphant | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

[Stealth3kpl]

I'd like to try diafine with Acros. This guy found it to be great too.

 

I've read that Diafine has very lenient time/temp dependency. These examples have very different development times:

Sara on Film | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Sara, headshot on Neopan | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

Why would one use such different development times? Do you think it was simply because of different developing temperature?

Pete

[Stealth3kpl]

I'd like to try diafine with Acros. This guy found it to be great too.

 

 

The page where this video originated with the diafine results alluded to.

 

More info here with TriX and diafine.

Pete

Edited May 29, 2011 by Stealth3kpl

[Stealth3kpl]

My first experiment with Diafine and Acros 100, Epson V700. A walk in the woods with the dog:

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pete

[stunsworth]

My first experiment with Diafine and Acros 100, Epson V700. A walk in the woods with the dog:

 

The only problem is that it's virtually impossible to draw any conclusions based on a 900 pixel ~100k Jpeg.

[Stealth3kpl]

I accept what you're saying, but being scanned with a flat bed, some would argue that we can't draw any conclusions about sharpness or grain no matter how big the file. From my point of view Diafine was idiot proof in that I warmed A up in a jug in the bath until its temperature was a degree or so into the recommended range. Felt the jug containing B to judge whether or not it was at a similar temperature ( I didn't want to swap my one thermometer from one jug to the other contaminating each), then used 5+5. This film was exposed at EI100 (Diafine recommends 200) but has come out fine with good contrast and looks sharp. To my uneducated eye the negatives look good. My previous Ilfosol3 Acros and HP5 negs look bland in comparison to these and require much more work in PP.

I'm chuffed with the stuff so far.

Pete

Edited June 9, 2011 by Stealth3kpl

[cbretteville]

If you're happy with the results Pete, that is what counts.

Carl

[Stealth3kpl]

Another couple from this film (Acros 100 at EI100 diafine 5+5 at 75F ish).

Pete

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!