[K David]

Last night I published a new video in an ongoing series I'm doing called All About Film (AAF.) AAF will look at in-production films and provide technical and practical advice and tips with sample images and technical explanations.

Here's my first one, FP4+:

You Tube

You Tube

[fuent104]

I can see, and very much appreciate the amount of effort that you have put into this. Bravo for this.

I only see one flaw, but, (and I hate to say this), it is a deal-breaker for me. The photographs you've presented look very low quality for this type of presentation. I don't know if they are from low resolution scans, or if any post work was done on them. However, on my computer, they mostly look very flat, with the exception of some areas that are blown out. I can't tell what is in focus in some of them.

None of them really look like finished photographs to me. Not that I require a ton of manipulation, but these images remind of something printed in the darkroom with 0 contrast paper and a 0 contrast filter. That's just not a way many photographers have ever worked.

I can see how looking at such images might benefit curious experts. However, I feel like beginners are the people who have the most to gain from all of the wonderful information you are presenting. Unfortunately, if I were a beginner and I thought those images represented the best of what I could expect from FP4 Plus, there is absolutely no way I'd consider purchasing it.

I don't mean to sound hateful, because, like I said, I appreciate what you've done. If your goal is to show the totality of what the film can capture, then perhaps just a few "before" and "after" images to show what kind of quality can be achieved in a finished image, would be helpful for viewers.

[K David]

on my computer, they mostly look very flat, with the exception of some areas that are blown out.

I think that's your computer. On mine, both the originals and the video on YouTube, there are no blown-out highlights on any photos. I almost never let an image get so blown out as to have any data in zone 10, so I suspect your monitor's brightness is set significantly higher than mine.

[ant11sam]

Hi!

I watched last night!
Just when my search on "what film to get" as began For the Yashica GSN... It works! Hiupyyy!!
I found it very informative. And also my old kwnolege as been completly outdated...

Thanks!

[K David]

For the Yashica GSN

That's going to be a great combination. The GSN takes stunning photos and I expect that its lens' qualities will render well on FP4+.

[todd]

I don't know a lot, haven't shot a lot of film and what little I have has been all Portra (except for one roll of Ektar), because I love it. That said I watched about half your presentation the other night on my phone before it ran out of juice and thought a lot of the images were very nice and planted the desire to get some of this film (in 120 for my TLR) to take it for a spin. So, I obviously don't agree with fuent104 here. I am like you and don't like much grain, so you were definitely talking to me with the results you get. I found your video well done and informative and will finish up my viewing when I get the chance... Thanks for making it! looking forward to your Portra video!

[K David]

Thanks for making it! looking forward to your Portra video!

Thank you, Todd.

I'm taking images this spring and summer for the Portra 160, 400, and 800 videos as well as Ektar 100.

David

[Pentaxis]

Last night I published a new video in an ongoing series I'm doing called All About Film (AAF.) AAF will look at in-production films and provide technical and practical advice and tips with sample images and technical explanations.

Here's my first one, FP4+:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjpArJP4PYU

Hello K David,

Many thanks for your video. You asked if anybody could provide you with a general equation for calculating needed exposures in FP4+, when corrected for reciprocity failure in the film. I worked on that. First, I visually estimated coordinates for points on the Ilford reciprocity law curve. Then in a spreadsheet I generated a curve-fitting equation and think I have got a good solution. I checked the equation manually and it is an excellent fit at longer exposures but a slightly worse fit at briefer exposures. I have attached a screen shot of the curve fit and it shows the curve-fitting equation. I hope this makes sense but if not please let me know.

Roy (Pentaxis)

[tuco]

Nice effort. Perhaps color balance the video better. Those Ilford film boxes should be white not yellow. Some notable things. If you're going to talk about a BW film you should mention its general category. Is the film a tabular or cubic grain film, for example. And the speed of a film is largely a function of the developer. Some developers yield box speed while many do not.