Hi Mark ... Thanks for that very thorough report. The inconsistencies with J&C film are enough to put me off using it, at least with 120.
I'm not a nature photographer, and the detail on many of your pics are lost on the small monitors, so I was wondering as I was looking at the pics if you had any photos of people - portraits, candids, etc. Shel "When you find yourself beginning to feel a bond between yourself and the people you photograph, when you laugh and cry with their laughter and tears, you will know you are on the right track." - Arthur Fellig > [Original Message] > From: Mark Cassino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Date: 5/31/2005 6:34:41 AM > Subject: Re: Getting That Old Fashioned Glow > > Classic Pan 200 was my standard film for most of last summer - I shot > somewhere around 50 rolls, 120 format. A few shots taken with it: > > http://www.markcassino.com/feature.htm > > http://www.markcassino.com/galleries/asga/asga00.htm > > http://www.markcassino.com/galleries/asga/asga03.htm > > http://www.markcassino.com/galleries/asga/asga04.htm > > http://www.markcassino.com/galleries/asga/asga13.htm > > http://www.markcassino.com/galleries/asga/asga21.htm > > I switched over to APX 100 when JandC ran out of CP200 late last year. > Ordered up another 20 rolls of the new CP200, but it seems to be subtly > different than the old (not surprising to see batch to batch variation in a > film like this.) > > With proper treatment you can produce a beautiful negative with this film. > Personally, I exposed at ISO 100 (there was virtually no shadow detail at > ISO 200), developed in HC 110 Dil H for 17 minutes, with agitation only once > every 3 minutes. It brought out beautiful shadow detail while preventing > the highlights from blocking up. (Dil H is an 'unofficial dilution, 1:64 - > double the dilution of Dil B.) > > I would rinse the film with water and then apply the acid stop bath - I had > a few cases of pin holes when I just dropped the acid bath in. I also used a > hardening fixer. The folks at JandC said you could go either way on > hardening it or not. > > This is a very low contrast film - it's hard to factor in the agitation and > dilution aspects of the developer, but I basically was over exposing it by a > full stop and pushing the development to some degree at least. I also found > that it needed additional adjustment with filters - I got very poor shadow > detail with a #25 red filter and 3 stop exposure adjustment. With the green > filter I went to a 3 stop adjustment, more than the 2.5 stops I'd usually > do. > > With the new batch of CP200 I've cut development time by 3 minutes and the > negs still look a little dense, so YMMV, as they say. > > I only tried a couple of rolls of CP400 so never really got to know it. It > seemed to be comparable in many ways to CP200 (except faster.) > > The biggest PITA about CP200 in 120 format is that the film is not rolled > onto the spools as well as modern films. This is the only 120 film I've used > where I would find light leaks along the edges pretty consistently. I > finally wound up bringing a black T-Shirt along with me in the field and > using it as a covering cloth when changing film - and then promptly > transferring the exposed rolls into a dark bag. Even then, a slight squeeze > to the center of the roll could result in light leaks, even in the subdued > indoor light of my basement. > > And if you do use 120 film - note that JandC often neglects to put glue on > the end of the roll tag (most of the CP200 I bought this year has no glue, > last years stock did.) So you need to bring tape to tape the roll shut (a > rubber band will compress the center of the roll, push the ends out, and > cause light leaks.) > > At the end of the day - with the right development of APX 100 (I'm using a > more dilute version of HC100) I find that the results are every bit as good > as CP200, and the AGFA product is much easier to handle and is a cheaper as > well... except for them going bankrupt I'd plan on using it indefinitely. >
