TheGodParticle/Hari Posted September 7, 2014 Author Share #41 Posted September 7, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Back on the resolution thing, you may be interested in the work of Henning Serger: Rollei RPX 25: Grain and Resolution He makes several posts in that thread about his testing of these films, I think you may well think differently about sending out CMS 20 and getting scans back once you have digested all his results. BTW I am not 100% convinced by how bad their scanning results were but I know enough about the available scanning routes to know there is no way you are ever going to get much more than about 1/4 of the resolution available in that film. Thank you for sharing this link, unfortunately it doesn't seem to work for me I'll try again in a few hours, curious to see the tests and the results I'm just hoping these labs can do a slightly better than average job for the moment, I'll eventually develop and scan at home Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 7, 2014 Posted September 7, 2014 Hi TheGodParticle/Hari, Take a look here ADOX CMS 20. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
TheGodParticle/Hari Posted September 7, 2014 Author Share #42 Posted September 7, 2014 Your comment made me curious, so I googled. I had never noticed that my M6 shutter speed dial works in the opposite direction to my M-E! I use both in manual and never have any problems moving the dial in the right direction, weird.... Crazy how you never noticed! Not only the opposite direction movement but the physical size of the dial itself is too small for my taste The m6ttl fixed both these issues and added a red dot between the two exposure triangles to denote perfect exposure. I appreciate the 1/2 stops on the newer lenses much more than ever now! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGodParticle/Hari Posted September 7, 2014 Author Share #43 Posted September 7, 2014 This is such a weird thread on so many levels Perhaps it is What do you find weird about it? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted September 7, 2014 Share #44 Posted September 7, 2014 Whitewall are on agenda, which scanner(s) do you use? I have a Plustech 35mm scanner (not sure which model number) and an Epson flatbed (for 6x6 negatives and transparencies). I have found that getting one good scan can take a while (dust, bits of fibre etc.) - a good brush and blower is essential, then lots of patience if you want that perfect scan. The only improvement over developing is the absence of chemicals, and of course you don't work in the dark. I have only one film Leica (M3) and a Hasselblad SWC/M - neither has a particularly fast shutter. I'd recommend the use of filters with B&W film as it increases your options considerably - if I recall correctly, I have yellow, orange and red, but not in all sizes and I stupidly sold my collection of Zeiss filters for Hasselblad. Cheers John PS - I'm not sure you will get the entire benefit of this film if you don't develop the negs and scan them yourself ... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DigitalHeMan Posted September 8, 2014 Share #45 Posted September 8, 2014 Do any film Leicas go faster than 1/1000 or is the dearly departed ikon the only one that does 1/2000? I'd love to stick the f1 v4 with the vario ND filter and 75Lux to shoot wide open with this film thanks to the samples Steve shared with us. Unfortunately not..... ND filters or pulling film are the only options Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ejd Posted September 8, 2014 Share #46 Posted September 8, 2014 (edited) Do any film Leicas go faster than 1/1000 or is the dearly departed ikon the only one that does 1/2000? None of the Leica rangefinder cameras go faster than 1/1000 (as far as I know) [as I now see Simon Leech pointed out in the previous post -- apologies, Simon, I wasn't looking carefully enough]. Some of the reflex cameras do -- the R8 and R9 to 1/8000, for example. But probably not what you are after. The Voigtlander Bessa cameras like the Ikon also go to 1/2000. I have found some of the earlier Adox CHS 25 in the refrigerator -- dated 2008. I should use it up one of these days. Not sure how it compares with this new emulsion. I chiefly remember from using it before that it exhausted the fixer very quickly. Heavy deposit of silver in the bottle after a few films. I'll develop it in whatever developer is on the go at the time (ID11? Rodinal? or maybe some Fuji Microfine, which I understand is like Perceptol) and scan using a Minolta Scan Dual II (assuming the scanner will still be working then). The older film had a nice old-fashioned look, as promised, but I don't recall being blown away by its sharpness. Edited September 8, 2014 by ejd Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted September 8, 2014 Share #47 Posted September 8, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Perhaps it is What do you find weird about it? The misinformation, the naivety and the misconceptions are mind boggling. Just a question; why do you want to shoot film if you don't know anything about it and why CMS20, for a digital look? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DigitalHeMan Posted September 8, 2014 Share #48 Posted September 8, 2014 The misinformation, the naivety and the misconceptions are mind boggling. Just a question; why do you want to shoot film if you don't know anything about it and why CMS20, for a digital look? Did you everything about the medium you photographed with the first time you picked up a new camera, for example your first film, or first digital? No? Why did you do it then? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ash Posted September 8, 2014 Share #49 Posted September 8, 2014 The misinformation, the naivety and the misconceptions are mind boggling. Just a question; why do you want to shoot film if you don't know anything about it and why CMS20, for a digital look? I agree with your assessment that the CMS20 is one of the films that is closest to a digital look. In this respect it might be a bad choice for the film enthusiast. Nevertheless, it is a step towards the use of film which I respect. Appetite grows with eating! Regards, Steve 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ejd Posted September 10, 2014 Share #50 Posted September 10, 2014 This thread has prompted me to read up a bit more on the new CMS 20 ii film. It is clearly very different from the earlier CHS 25. While Adox strongly recommend the use of their Adotech II developer, even they admit the possibility of others. On their website they say "If used in pictorial photography the film achieves 20 ASA of usable speed in ADOTECH developer. If used for high contrast purposes the usable speed increases to 80 ASA. If developed in non dedicated low contrast developers (HC 110, cafenol etc) it can be exposed at 3-6 ASA." So using caffenol is possibility, and with a speed of 3-6, and then it would be possible to use e.g. a Noctilux wide open in bright sunlight on a Leica M film body without an ND filter. Also HC-110, which I did not realise was a low-contrast developer. If this film tends to develop very high contrast, then pulling it -- more exposure, less development -- would seem the obvious way to get acceptable contrast and also presumably even finer grain. All that's written about this film and the images that have been posted are intriguing and I am tempted to try a few rolls of it. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted September 11, 2014 Share #51 Posted September 11, 2014 . If this film tends to develop very high contrast, then pulling it -- more exposure, less development -- would seem the obvious way to get acceptable contrast and also presumably even finer grain And how many variables have you introduced in that one sentence? Variables that a beginner has to understand in the first place, then overcome in practice. I have taught photography to a high level, and with beginners the teachers job is not to load them down with all the photographic techniques in the world, it is to guide the learner through a logical and easy to follow sequence of events. One thing you don't do with a beginner is throw them in at the deep end holding on to a block of CMS 20. Unless a beginner see's by their own efforts what a 'good' negative looks like, and understand how they got to that point, then they will have no understanding of what a 'bad' negative looks like. Which is why a benign medium speed film and a well known developer in a manufacturer recommended dilution is a datum point. But as ever, even with that you'll still get the answers to posts like 'I've never had a problem with Rodinal at 1+100 left standing for 24 hrs', and people won't realise what they are saying is selfish, it is just demonstrating their knowledge of the photographic process so far, not helping a beginner who already has a big problem. Steve 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_parker Posted September 11, 2014 Share #52 Posted September 11, 2014 (edited) And how many variables have you introduced in that one sentence? Variables that a beginner has to understand in the first place, then overcome in practice. I have taught photography to a high level, and with beginners the teachers job is not to load them down with all the photographic techniques in the world, it is to guide the learner through a logical and easy to follow sequence of events. One thing you don't do with a beginner is throw them in at the deep end holding on to a block of CMS 20. Unless a beginner see's by their own efforts what a 'good' negative looks like, and understand how they got to that point, then they will have no understanding of what a 'bad' negative looks like. Which is why a benign medium speed film and a well known developer in a manufacturer recommended dilution is a datum point. But as ever, even with that you'll still get the answers to posts like 'I've never had a problem with Rodinal at 1+100 left standing for 24 hrs', and people won't realise what they are saying is selfish, it is just demonstrating their knowledge of the photographic process so far, not helping a beginner who already has a big problem. Steve Hi Steve I respect your view and experience in this, which is far greater than mine but has everyone missed GP's comment that he is sending the films away to be developed ? Ps. Obviously it's for John to justify his post but I'm not sure it was intended as advice to a beginner, just an expression of his own interest in what might be achieved. Edited September 11, 2014 by robert_parker 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted September 11, 2014 Share #53 Posted September 11, 2014 but has everyone missed GP's comment that he is sending the films away to be developed ? . And I wouldn't encourage that either.... Steve Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJH Posted September 11, 2014 Share #54 Posted September 11, 2014 Its something Steve I am going off of, been looking through all the negs I got back from the lab this year and scanning them myself rather than relying on the labs scans. I was definitely over-exposing B&W a little on a consistent basis but it looks to me like the large scale dip and dunk (i guess here this is what he uses) is over cooking the film as well. All of the neopan 400 looks way more grainy than I think it should but I will need to develop it myself or get someone local who has more recent film processing and printing experience than me to look at it. I can clearly remember printing Ilford 400 speed film to 10x8 20 odd years ago and it had barely any grain, it only looked grainy pushed or enlarged more to my memory. Now I am scanning myself I have one of the variables under my own control but I don't really have control on the development, this is really clear to me now after 30 odd rolls and several months experience. To be honest I don't really think sending B&W film out for processing is such a great idea, just to many issues compared to the C-41 or E6 the lab has done for me which all looks very consistent. Having shot XP2 myself this year alongside Acros, Tmax 400 and neopan 400 I can really see now why some sage old advice on films often refers to XP2 if one is sending it out. I actually feel it gives me the nicest overall results when scanned of all those films as well, its more 'filmic' looking than Acros IMHO which is hilarious thinking about how often chromogenic films get slated. Sorry OP for yet more advice to do something different but I feel if you are not processing it yourself I would stick to C-41 or E6 films 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted September 12, 2014 Share #55 Posted September 12, 2014 CMS 20 is a difficult film, more or less exposure has more of an effect than with other films, even with the dedicated developer. So sending it out consigns you to an endless merry-go-round of questions, is it the lab, is it me, is it the camera, is it just that it isn't working? Ilford labs can sympathetically process FP4 or Delta 100, for instance, but because it isn't such an extreme film as CMS it is easier to judge the results. For XP2 or a Tmax film the development is set no matter what the lab does, C41 process is what it is, no opinions, no 'I've never had a problem with...'. But it is easy to see where over and under exposure are affecting the films character (more exposure less grain, less exposure more sharpness) so it's clearer where to set your meter. So while niche processing options throw up potential questions, the more benign options throw up more answers, whether you go to a lab or do it yourself. Steve 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted September 12, 2014 Share #56 Posted September 12, 2014 (edited) I have a Plustech 35mm scanner (not sure which model number) and an Epson flatbed (for 6x6 negatives and transparencies). I have found that getting one good scan can take a while (dust, bits of fibre etc.) - a good brush and blower is essential... ...as is some isopropyl alcohol... ...and unless using a professional scanner and post-processor (ie the person with the expertise and equipment to get the file right) I agree that negative scanning is best done by you rather than the lab. Edited September 12, 2014 by MarkP 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DigitalHeMan Posted September 13, 2014 Share #57 Posted September 13, 2014 ...as is some isopropyl alcohol.... What would the alcohol be for? Cleaning the flatbed glass? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ejd Posted September 13, 2014 Share #58 Posted September 13, 2014 (edited) For anyone interested in trying this film with different developers and using it at different exposures and film speeds, there is at least one thread on rangefinder forum that reports various experiences: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=118206&highlight=adox+cms+20 http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=116832&highlight=adox+cms+20+ii&page=2 E.g, one contributor has exposed it at ISO 12 and developed in Rodinal 1:200 for 14 minutes 'semi-stand' and provides some images. Also at ISO 6 developed for 20 minutes. But many comments on results with other developers etc too Edited September 13, 2014 by ejd Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotomas Posted September 13, 2014 Share #59 Posted September 13, 2014 According to my experience with the CMS 20 and other films of this high-contrast document films (Kodak Technical Pan, Agfa CopyPanRapid, Rollei ATP etc.) you only receive a good tonal range if you use special developers for this propose. And even than the handling is challenging. You have to be precise in everything you do. The examples given in the rangefinder forum show this typical lost of shadow details to me, that you get with standard developers. For me it wouldn't make sense to shoot with this film form hand. Always use a tripod. They claim you could reach 20 ASA with the Adotech developer. But that's a push developing, in my opinion. I use it with 12 ASA, and I'm afraid it would like 10 ASA even more. But if you accept all the adversity that comes with this process you can receive a very impressive quality, if you like sharp and grainless pictures. I've shown some results in the German forum. Unfortunately the CMS 20 example was not taken with a Leica, rather with a Mamiya 7: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/analog-forum/219565-die-perfektion-der-m-70.html#post2657465 The detail in the middle is 100% crop from the upper picture. But there is also a example with a similar kind of film (CopexPan) with my Leica: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/analog-forum/219565-die-perfektion-der-m-56.html#post2406476 f-) 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ejd Posted September 13, 2014 Share #60 Posted September 13, 2014 Searching more carefully on this forum, I see that there have been several threads devoted to Adox CMS 20. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/analog-forum/231572-adox-20-cms.html http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/analog-forum/183157-adox-cms-20-schoener-film.html http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/film-forum/230782-adox-20-cms.html http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/film-forum/251296-adox-cms-20-a.html http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/analog-forum/190789-adox-cms-20-a.html?highlight=adox+cms+20 All in all there seems to be quite a lot of collective experience to draw on. The difficulties of using this film are made clear, but also the possibilities. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
copy4.thumb.jpeg.b0a5d1413ae60416fbf2f5fe0e3cb46b.jpeg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.