|
Discuss
|
|
For motion captures or for regular photography. I'm a bit lost on the direction this one is taking...
|
|
good point, I was sleepy and confused the "Film" and "Film photography" forums. But hey, either way I would like to know.
|
|
Well in that case I must say that for regular still shots I use Tmax. Always have and probably always will. Damn product loyalty!
As for motion film I've just started to use Kodak Vision2 100T 5212 / 7212 for the 35mm format. It's insanely nice and is capable of handling both 35mm and digital processes.
|
|
Since I shoot mostly on super 8 with some DV and 16mm on the side I have to pledge my alleigance to Tri-X. At 200ASA I can pull images out of near darkness with a fast lense and I appreciate the aesthetic of the black and white grain, particuarly for UE footage. I'd really like to try Vision 200T and 500T but I'd have to special order it and its so much easier to just go out and buy the Tri-X, Kodachrome and Ektachrome off the shelf. Soon...
==========================
Amy Smith is an infected slut |
|
You've forgotten Plus X.
I got your tour winner right here pussies, at least he'd crash out trying. |
|
I rarely use Plus-X. I use B&W for UE which is usually in subdued light. When I shoot during the day its usually for other projects that I do in colour. Astute observation though Orson.
==========================
Amy Smith is an infected slut |
|
1. T-Max 100
2. Neopan Acros 100
3. Agfa APX 100
4. Fomapan 100
5. Ilford Delta 100, PAN 100 & other
|
|
I went with Tri-X, but the correct answer is HP5+.
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away."
-Tom Waits |
|
Tri-X + HC-110 match made in heaven
Although I've been using Tmax 400 and HC-110 and loving the results as well.
Celer at Audax
Para la Victoria Siempre Alemanes! |
Ethics
