Hi Alex, Although it is common practice and it is unlikely to cause any problem, we don't recommend the idea of mixing different films in the same developing tank because the chemicals from the different emulsions can interact and affect development. Enabling the ability to search multiple fields w...

I've never really experimented with diluting my developers. Usually I just dilute 1:1. I'm told that by diluting more it introduces more sharpness, but also more grain. Is that true? I'm told also that when pushing tri-x to 1600 or 3200 diluting the developer will preserve image quality. Is that tr...

It's hopeless, sorry to say.

pirateoversixty wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 11:11 am wouldn't a 400 speed film underexposed by one stop give finer grain than 3200 exposed at 800?

No, but but grain is not the only issue. Underexposure looks like crap.

Never tested Neopan 400 for true speed, but exposed at 400, both 35 and 120, it always met my needs. If exposed at true 800, wouldn't a Neopan, UFX 400, Pancro 400, or HP5+ give a finer grain, if appropriately processed? I know the "pushed film drill," but an approximate one stop under is...

Don't really understand why 3200 was brought back. By my estimation, that is really really a niche film. Have not read very much about the new incarnation, but would hope that it is significantly changed from the old. Anyway, I doubt that I will ever get to try as my photography has drastically tap...

Granted, Acros did have some favorable characteristics going for it, probably the one most appreciated was its reciprocity, favored by low-lite shooters. Also, fine grain. Many 400-speed films today, including Neopan 400, if handled correctly, could almost equal Acros in apparent grain. There are q...

pirateoversixty wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 12:27 pm Didn't use a lot of it, but never could get a handle on it. Did use a lot of Neopan 400. Would certainly welcome its return rather than Acros.

Jim

Yep, me too!

Digitaltruth wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2019 3:46 am The time is for 1+1 dilution as in the original posted question.

Sorry, misread that.

For ISO 400, the time of 9 mins 45 seconds is correct at 20C/68F. This is published in most of Kodak's data sheets. If you are using a different time, please explain which data sheet it comes from and whether you have tested it. The time posted in our chart has been widely used by many people over ...

I'm hoping for a 400-speed Neopan resurrection....

Just get a precision scale. They're easily available.

I have no idea.

pirateoversixty wrote: ↑Sat Dec 01, 2018 12:27 pm Again, the term full tonal range. It is generally recognized that this is unachievable when pushing, though I must say that Appleyards photo using diafine was really fine-looking.

That's equivalent to saying you can't push film. It's a myth!

I tend to agree with Ornello. Film has only one speed with a given developer. To say I exposed a given film at an EI of 1000 really doesn't tell us much. What light meter was used? To what standard is the meter calibrated? Was it reflected light or incident light that was measured? How reflective w...