I'm a bit behind. I haven't scanned my film from week one because I have build up a significant backlog of developing and scanning. I did about a dozen rolls this past weekend, and didn't quite get to the film challenge rolls, except my experimental C41 B&W in E6 rolls. So these pictures were from a roll of 120 T400CN (Kodak) that expired in 2001. My first roll was pretty under exposed, but I haven't scanned it yet to see how much I can recover, but this roll was shot with my Pentax 67 at ISO 100 (using the meter in the TTL prism). For development, I calculated the 1st dev time using the formula based on how much it had been used, then I multiplied that time by 1.25, which came to something like 9.5 minutes.

The results had a noticeable green cast, so probably wouldn't work for projection (the cast has been removed in these scans). It may be that XP2 works better. My understanding is T400CN has the orange mask common to C41, and it may be that turned green in the E6. XP2 supposedly doesn't have the orange mask, so my turn out better.

SMC Takumar 150/2.8


SMC Takumar 105/2.4


SMC Takumar 105/2.4


(the last one was taken at ƒ2.8, a half stop up from wide open and shows off that amazing subject seperation that that lens is known for.)

These shots came out amazing. I'm always a bit jealous of you 67 shooters...

I don’t shoot the 67 as much as my Bronica, probably because the Bronica is more compact and portable, but I always like the results on the 67, and the negatives (or in this case, positives) are so beautifully huge. I’ve recently been eyeing a Voigtlander Bessa II to try out 6x9.

These following shots are from my first experimental roll of T400CN processed in E6. These were shot on my Bronica ETRSi, but after developing most of the shots were clearly underexposed, but after scanning, only a few weren't really salvageable. the first shot was taken with the PE 150/3.5 lens, the rest with the PE 75/2.8 lens.

The second set was nicely done also!

Here's mine for week 2: I shot with Ilford PanF+ at ISO50 and the LX with the FA 31 Limited. I've been mixing my own developers from recipes I find, and this one is ID-11 EX. The EX stands for extra (my own designation) from adding ammonium chloride to the ID-11 mix. According to what I could find, this makes ID-11 an extremely fine grain developer. But, it was also stated that you are suppose to double the exposure and the development times. This is the third roll I've used it on, and with the first roll I did double exposure and development times, it didn't work right. This roll and the previous one, I shot at box speed, and doubled the development time, and I like the results.

Very nice. I have a roll of PanF+ that I developed last night. I’ve shot a few rolls and really liked it, but some people online reccomended shooting it at 25, so that’s what I did, so we’ll see.

I've read that too, but haven't tried it just yet. I'm curious what your results will be. It is my favorite slow speed film right now.

I'll be posting some photos I took from three different films at the end of week two with my Bronica ETRSi. This post is Fomapan 100, shot at 100 and developed in Rodinal. These were (obviously) taken at White Sands National Monument. I went back because I thought Black&White might be a good look for the monument. Both were taken with the PE 75mm ƒ2.8 "normal" lens.

the next two shots are from a roll of Rollei RPX25. Again Bronica ETRSi, the first is the PE 150mm ƒ3.5, and the second is the PE 75mm, ƒ2.8.

EDIT: I forgot to add, that this roll was a little under developed. like an idiot, I mixed up my Xtol at 1:2, even though my recipe was for 1:1. so the dilution was off. Its not so noticable on these shots, but some darker shots lost detail and contrast.

These last three are from a roll of Ilford PanF+ exposed at EI 25 and developed in Xtol. The first two are the PE 75mm ƒ2.8 and the last one is the PE 150mm ƒ3.5.

I think the White Sands look great in black and white. I need to try the RPX 25 someday, it looks interesting to say the least. And the PanF shots came out great. I’m liking PanF more and more as I shoot it. Did you notice any advantage in image quality shooting at 25?

it seemed to reduce contrast a bit, but then I ended up bumping up the contrast after scanning, so, at least for now, I'll probably go back to 50 since I tend to shoot subjects that benefit from high contrast.

I do have a roll of PanF+ in 35mm that I shot at 25 also but I haven't developed it yet. Since I'm not an expert at any of this, I've kept to box speed before this, though after seeing my Tri-X shots earlier this month, I tried shooting a roll at 100, just to see if I can shoot nothing but Tri-X. It also lost contrast, but it still looks reasonably good. I can't say this with certainty, but it seems overexposure and pull developing generally results in reduced contrast. If you're shooting portraits with a high contrast film, that would make a lot of sense.

Hi guys. I scanned my first roll of Delta 3200, processed in Microphen stock solution according to box instructions yesterday and they look like poop! The TMax looked so much better... So today I'm scanning the roll a second time, hoping to get something presentable. It's possible there's some operator error. Since the operator was involved in multiple steps in the process, the odds are high. At any rate, my second roll will be shot at below box speed and we'll see what happens.

On an unrelated note, I also scanned a roll of Lomo 400 I had in the fridge with a C-41 stand development process I found online, and these look surprisingly good! I'll post an example or two of these also, or at least a link since they're not B/W. Or maybe I'll convert one to B/W just to skirt the rules here a little.

How many rolls/week are you guys shooting? I'm doing my best to do 1/w and I'm about a half-roll behind. Geoff, you're a machine!

Everybody's stuff looks great this month, however I'll be happy to have B/W month behind me for a while.

Cheers!

Technically Delta 3200 is around 1100-1200 ISO, according to what I’ve read, and shooting it at 3200 involves pushing (same with TXAX 3200). I used our extreme ISO month to test shooting Delta 3200 in low light, and for the most part, it came out pretty good, but the negatives were very thin.

As for roll quantity, I mainly shoot black and white, but several things have upped my output. First, I received a new camera (Olympus XA), some new lenses (some of Nikon F2 lenses, as well as some Bronica lenses that I haven’t posted yet.) and some new films I’ve never shot before (Ultrafine Xtreme 100 and 400). When I get new stuff, I try to shoot test rolls, which are usually black and white, to ensure the equipment works or the film behaves normally. That means I go through film quicker, because I’m less picky.

Second, the one thing I hate about 35mm is those !#*@! 36 exposure rolls that are ubiquitous. They take forever. Medium format 6x4.5, like my Bronica, is 15 shots per roll. 6x6 square (which I don’t have) is 12 per roll, and 6x7, like my Pentax 67, is 10 shots per roll. It is so much easier to finish a roll in a single outing. When I bulk load 35mm I usually shoot for 20-24 exposures in a roll, so I can finish them in a reasonable time (right now my Ultrafine films are both in bulk loaders.). So previously, when I posted three different rolls of film from my Bronica (Fomapan 100, RPX25, and PanF+) that was 45 shots from a day trip up to the Sacramento Mountains specifically for the purpose of taking photographs (actually just 40, since I had already shot 5 frames of a freak snowstorm that came out of nowhere.)

Aside from all that, if you’re shooting 36 exposure rolls of 35mm film, I think 1 roll/36 exposures a week is fine, and sometimes all I manage.

M50/1.7



M28/2



M50/1.7


This was the best of the bunch from the last roll of Delta 3200. I've got another roll that I'm going to pull at least a stop, maybe more. I'm not convinced I didn't muck these up in development, but since I did the same as I did for the TMax 3200 (also shot at 3200) so maybe that's all. It also looks like I've got some washout in my K2... unevenness looks like a possible light leak to me (the worst of which I deleted earlier) so I swapped the half-shot roll of TMax from the same K2 to my K1000. I like the K2 because it's got automatic exposure which I use almost exclusively with this camera.