Originally posted by Alex645 The Skyline in North America was called the Maxima, which is why I mentioned it. My dad recently passed away and your photo, micro spots and all, still brought back good memories. He owned two Maximas before his last car, a 2005 Toyota Avalon that he drove for 13 years until last November at the age of 96.
Not to ruffle the feathers of current Nissan fans, but back in the day, Datsun/Nissan made quality cars that matched the competition like Toyota and Honda. However when they merged with Renault and Mitsubishi in '99 they haven't made cars of the same calibre as before. The same fate has happened to others that have merged in other industries...but I must give credit to Ricoh for the quality they've maintained with Pentax. But I suppose an outright acquisition is different than a merge.
In the late 1980s, I had a funny little Nissan called an Axxess. I had the top line model that was made in Japan. My brother liked it enough that he bought one, but he got a lesser model that was made in Smyrna Tennessee. Mine was, by far, the more trouble free vehicle.
I’m on my third Nissan Titan. I wanted a full sized truck for construction and trailer towing and decided that I would stay with Nissan. My first truck was quite good, the second had been taken swimming by a previous owner, so I let it go very quickly, and the one I am driving now is a Cummins diesel model.
Why I went with Nissan rather than a domestic was that even though the Titan is an American design and manufacture, I was hoping that having adults in the room would make for a better quality truck. So far, it seems to have worked out. My Titans have been more trouble free than the big three vehicles that construction industry friends drive, though there were problems with the Cummins block heater that caused quite a bit of grief for owners.
---------- Post added 04-20-19 at 11:07 AM ----------
Originally posted by goddo31 I've recently been experimenting with shooting Ilford FP4plus in 120.
Results have been good however on both of the 2 rolls so far there's visible 'spotting' on some of the shots after scanning.
When viewing the negatives I can sometimes see a kind of 'grit' that looks tiny bits of emulsion.
Appearance in scanned photos is less noticeable than I expected when looking at the negatives, although it is still visible in some scenes.
For an example please see the attachment. Note that some photos are a bit worse than this one. I have had similar 'spotting' with other films, however nothing to the extent of this. I can remove it in Lightroom but the sheer volume of spots make that a time consuming exercise.
Does anyone have any suggestions as to why this is happening?
My development procedure
- Ilford FP4plus exposed as ISO 100
- Developed in ID-11 1+1 to the timings listed with the developer for ISO 125 (I think this roll was 11 minutes at 20 degrees)
- agitate for 5 seconds every minute
- stop in plain tap water at say, 25 degrees, for 2 minutes
- Ilford rapid fixer, 5 minutes at ~ 25 degrees (I don't bother to chill the fixer to 20 degrees)
- Rinse with tap water first and finish with demineralised water
I regularly use the same procedure for other films, such as Tri-X, without any issues.
And the fullsize photo below:
I used to have that crop up from time to time. I put a good quality water filter onto my supply, and started pre wetting my film for several minutes prior to developing and that seemed to help.
Make sure you are using a very dilute stopbath, try ~2% acetic acid and also if you have hard water, you might want to start using demineralized water for your chemistry.
Note that a water softener does not solve any problems in this regard.
Last edited by Wheatfield; 04-20-2019 at 11:20 AM.