First, on the subject of paint, I must disagree with Mr. Hermanson. Please
note that, among modelers, the subject of paint can be as controversial as
the subject of Kodachrome/not Kodachrome among photographers.
While good for many uses, the Floquil paints are not the best choice for
this use, as most produce a flat finish. As a little sideline, I do custom
painting, and I still prefer solvent paint. My first choice would be
Accu-Paint, but it is very scarce. The next best choice is Scalecoat. The
only real difference is drying time, with Scalecoat a little slower. Both of
these are available from stores that cater to railroad modelers. It may be
easier to get Testor's Model Master paints, usually available at stores like
Hobby Lobby. All of these paints produce a gloss finish this I feel would
better match the factory finish on OM's. If you must use water thinned
paints, Badger Model Flex or Tamiya paints would be a good choice. In any
case, it's my feeling that the white will be easy to patch, but the black
will be next to impossible with any degree of durability.
On film. The Ilford film mentioned is the one I have mentioned before, where
I have gotten a substantial speed gain in dip-and-dunk Xtol. I've just
finished the last of my bargain FP4+, and am going back to my old favorite,
Plus-X, but I was getting about 160 to 200 ASA routinely. since another
member recommends ASA 100, this tells me either he likes really thick
negatives, or this film is quite flexible in development. I have had good
experience with it, but am going back to Plus-X because of years of
experience. Of course, after a year of Ilford, I may have to refamiliarize
myself. The current version of this film is FP4+ (and HP5+), considered by
many a great improvement.
Do manufacturers of private label film just relabel their current stock, or
continue to produce the old emulsion? I would think this is a great deal
more difficult that a VCR or toaster.
On the subject of Seattle film works: It is my understanding that their film
is made by Agfa, the world's largest manufacturer of private label film, and
has been C41 as long. There are companies in Hollywood that specialize in
selling film ends, the unexposed pieces left in magazines, usually 50 to 400
feet in length, and this is where SFW got theirs. For whatever reason, they
went to C41. It is easier, all in all, to process C41, if for no other
reason, the removal of the heavy anti-halation backing. I also suspect the
chemistry is a lot cheaper, and the machines probably are as well.
In any event, the last time they sent me a free roll was several years ago,
and it was Agfa. this is about the same as Walgreen's film, good but not
great. This is all possible because Kodak makes a film especially for making
slides from C41 negatives. It produces great results, but, like prints,
requires a good printer. Most big pro labs offer this service. Although it
can be expensive, expect about a dollar a slide, if you are just getting a
few made, it might be a good alternative to SFW.
Bill Pearce
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|