Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Vibration study

Subject: [OM] Re: Vibration study
From: AG Schnozz <agschnozz@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 09:51:20 -0800 (PST)
Tris wrote:
>As for what Tri-X "always wanted to be" . . . I don't think
>anyone with experience with the older Tri-X emulsions would
>care to detract from its thoroughly-documented unsurpassed (or
>even closely-approached) qualities.

Not denegrading Tri-X.  It's just that technology rolled on. 
Tri-X was "state-of-the-art" for many years.  It just isn't
anymore.  My point is, that Delta 400/DD-X is able to recreate
the Tri-X look better than the NEW TRI-X is able to do. 
However, Delta 400 doesn't stop there.  It gives you the
flexibility to achieve another half zone on either end of
latitude. You can either use this latitude which gives you a
modern T-grain look, or hack it off and get the Tri-X look.

Skip Williams has probably done the finest job, I've seen, of
getting the Tri-X look out of Delta 400.

I could go on with several other areas where I feel that Delta
400/DD-X is superior, but I won't.  I wouldn't expect ANYBODY to
take my word for it.  If you do get around to trying it, you'll
want it processed in spiral tank with DD-X, not replenished DD
or any other developer.  Only change to something else if you've
got specific reasons to.  It is a matched technology.

>Getting back to the vibration study: I'll repeat that no
>matter what happy qualities the new-and-improved C41 films
>bring to the table it ought to be clear that a micro-fine
>emulsion such as Tech Pan would be the logical choice for a
>B&W study of camera shake. Going to a C41 emulsion simply to 
>save a buck or two pretty much renders the study dubious on
>its face.

I partially agree with this assessment.  We're testing
vibrations, not lenses.  I believe that the resolution fall-off
with vibration occurs at a level not requiring tech pan (which I
acknowledge is an incredible film).  If you need greater
resolving ability than XP-2, then we've exceeded the scope of
the test in the first place.  If no vibration induced resolution
fall-off is visible in an XP-2 negative it will be a non-issue
with ANY E-6 or C-41 emulsion.  Vibration will ALWAYS be
present, but I'm interested in establishing a "threshold" that
filters out the variations caused by whether or not the stereo
was playing in the background.  Anything below that "threshold"
is too variable to be usable.

Tech pan, would be the "ideal" test film.  Maybe.  You'd
probably get more harmonics from lunar phases than you would
from the tripod.  :-)

AG

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/

The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe

To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus 
List Problem"

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz