Acros replacement options
Old 04-08-2018   #1
Brian Legge
Registered User
 
Brian Legge is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 2,684
Acros replacement options

With Acros officially gone, it seemed like it would be worth starting a thread about options for replacing Acros. I originally planned to stock up on it but would rather support a company still dedicated to producing film.

I loved Acros for its fine grain, tonality, and ease of development. I experimented for a while before settling on shooting it at 50 and developing it in Rodinal. That worked well as I was shooting Tri X and developing it in Rodinal as well.

At this point, I'm ready to reassess all of it.

Others may want something else from this thread, but what I'd like are suggestions for:

- A film/developer pair with starting point suggestions for development times to replace Acros.
- Film available in 35mm and 120
- Ideally a pair with a reasonable price (some of the suggestions I've seen are 2-3x more expensive than Acros/Rodinal). I know this will vary by region.
- Bonus points if there is a 200-400 speed film that works with the developer.

I'm hoping others find this thread useful and that we're able to keep it separate from the main Acros thread. Lots of us used Acros for various reasons. Having a dedicated space to sort out replacements would be helpful.
__________________
Shooting whatever I can get my hands on.
Recent Work
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-08-2018   #2
Larry Cloetta
Registered User
 
Larry Cloetta is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jackson, WY
Age: 69
Posts: 1,420
Film stocks are like dogs. A film stock you have grown to like is like a dog you have grown to love. When he’s gone he can be “replaced”, but never duplicated, and it will never be the same. Better not to attempt the impossible, but just love what is left on its own merits.
No two film stocks look alike, no matter how they are shot or developed. Similar, some, certainly, but never the same. When she’s gone she’s gone.
But, if I were to pretend otherwise, and in the spirit of the thread, Tmax 100 in Tmax developer or Perceptol (because ACROS had as many “looks” as there are developers).

Missing Panatomic X, somethind else for which there are no duplicates.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-08-2018   #3
Fixcinater
Never enough smoky peat
 
Fixcinater is offline
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Portales, NM, USA
Posts: 542
My suggestion would be Ilford's Delta 100. They have a Delta 400 for your faster speed needs, both available in 35mm and 120. I use HC110 1:100, works fine while being simple to use (I use a baby medicine syringe to dose out the 3-5ml each roll gets immediately before dilution for use) and is quite inexpensive to use one-shot.

Not the same tonality (nothing is, Acros was fairly unique in its spectral sensitivity) but Ilford is likely the best company in terms of long term support of traditional b&w film.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-08-2018   #4
znapper
Registered User
 
znapper's Avatar
 
znapper is offline
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 402
Delta is NOT a viable replacement, the tonality is totally different due to Ilford having more red sensitivity.

Both TMax100 and Delta 100 are close, in terms of grain.
Tonality, perhaps FP4.

You may also like Adox 100 CHS in terms of tonality....don't think it's similar in the grain-department.

Reciprocity-vise......you are buggered.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-08-2018   #5
LukeBanks
Registered User
 
LukeBanks's Avatar
 
LukeBanks is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: London
Posts: 82
I never shot a huge amount of Acros myself so couldn't offer an accurate direct comparison but I do develop all of my film in Rodinal. The last 18 months or so have seen me shooting Fomapan film exclusively. I prefer the Fomapan 400 stock for daylight work in the UK, where there is often a significant lack of said daylight, but it comes at 100 / 200 / 400 speeds in both 35mm and 120.

I absolutely love it. When developed as per instruction in Rodinal the mid and silver tones really hit the sweet spot for me. The resultant negative is therefore often a little flatter than some would like, but I'd rather the ability to add contrast during printing than forcibly reduce it.

It is worth noting that Foma produce a developer of their own named Fomadon R09 which is essentially Agfa Rodinal. This may be of use to you in replicating your previous work flow, and it is also the Rodinal stock that my technician uses to develop my film for me so I know it compliments Fomapan films very well. I've found the combination incredibly stable, with films developed 12 months apart always showing identical exposure and density values during scanning. Although that's probably more a compliment to the technician than the brand.

But here's the best bit.....!!!

Cost per roll of 35mm x36 from my favoured supplier as of right now:

Fuji Acros - £6.29
Fomapan - £3.26

Two for the price of one!

And finally, an example of Fomapan 400 developed in Rodinal.



I hope that's of use to somebody out there. If not, this thread will undoubtedly produce the goods.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-08-2018   #6
znapper
Registered User
 
znapper's Avatar
 
znapper is offline
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 402
I also like Fomapan, I basically shoot Foma and Acros in 100.
Foma is "older", amazing tonality, really a "retro" type of film.

It has less red-sensitivity than Acros, and that's why I really like it and shoot it a lot.

Acros is more clinical, much cleaner and definitely better resolution.
Also, the reciprocity properties of Foma is......not Acros =)

I do like both, but they are definitely not the same
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-08-2018   #7
Bill Clark
Registered User
 
Bill Clark's Avatar
 
Bill Clark is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Minnetonka, Minnesota
Age: 71
Posts: 2,504
My thoughts, there are plenty of other films to buy and use.

I bought some Legacy 100 (as I understand it is Acros, it says made in Japan on the container) 100 foot rolls of 35 mm when Freestyle was closing it out. Primiarly because of the price.

Also bought some Legacy 400 at the same time.
__________________
I make photographs as a return ticket to a moment otherwise gone.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-08-2018   #8
Freakscene
Deregistered user
 
Freakscene's Avatar
 
Freakscene is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: In exile
Posts: 1,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by znapper View Post
It has less red-sensitivity than Acros, and that's why I really like it and shoot it a lot.
Foma 100 has vastly *more* red sensitivity than Acros:
http://www.foma.cz/en/fomapan-100
https://www.fujifilmusa.com/shared/b...anAcros100.pdf

TMX is closest in grain. Both TMX and Delta 100 can be similar tonally with careful choice of developer. Both TMX and Delta 100 need heavy filtration to get a similar spectral response, with a large attendant loss of speed. Neither have reciprocity characteristics anything like as good as Acros but TMX is better than Delta 100 in this regard:
http://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites...6_TMax_100.pdf
https://www.ilfordphoto.com/amfile/f...roduct_id/679/

So, as usual, there is no direct replacement, in this case unsurprisingly, because Acros is an idiosyncratic product.

Marty
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-08-2018   #9
znapper
Registered User
 
znapper's Avatar
 
znapper is offline
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 402
That's funny, Foma also claim that their 100 ISO film is 100 and their 400 ISO film is 400, which they aren't in reality.

Delta gives paler lips on my models than Acros, which, again, gives paler lips than Foma. This is one of the more important aspects when i shoot, so that it why I tend to prefer certain films over the others.

Foma may _claim_ their red-sensitivity is such and such, but in reality (and luckily), my experience is that it really isn't, i get consistently darker lips on models with Foma, interpret that as you may.

In my experience, Ilford, Fuji and Kodak is usually much more consistent and correct in their charts than Fomapan.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-08-2018   #10
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 43
Posts: 8,890
There's nothing that compares to Acros' tonality, and that is a good thing. It had the ugliest tonality of any modern BW film. The midtones were flat and lifeless. Any other film is better in my opinion. The only thing Acros was good at was very low light work, because it had almost no reciprocity failure, and nothing else available can match Acros in that regard.

My favorite combination is Ilford FP-4 in PMK. FP-4 is a versatile film, though and it works well in Rodinal and D-76 too.

Tmax 100 in Rodinal, D-76, or Tmax Developer is nice too.

I have not tried Delta 100, but Delta 400 is beautiful in Tmax Developer.
  Reply With Quote

Acros for Portraits
Old 04-09-2018   #11
samuelphoto
Registered User
 
samuelphoto's Avatar
 
samuelphoto is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 148
Unhappy Acros for Portraits

I do beg to differ on one point, I really liked Acros for portraiture. It is outstanding in this regard. Some of the 16x20 prints that I've made with a Hassy are simply fabulous and hence good income producers.

I've been scouring the world trying to find some for sale. Wex in the UK has it but they won't ship out of the country. One of the Calumet stores in Germany had 3 rolls. B&H and Adorama are completely out. I've placed an order with Samy's. They have none in their warehouse but are going to pull together what they have in all their stores in SoCal, but I'm number 3 in line with a 40 roll order.

So, do I like it? Yes!
__________________
Havagudn!
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2018   #12
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto View Post
There's nothing that compares to Acros' tonality, and that is a good thing. It had the ugliest tonality of any modern BW film. The midtones were flat and lifeless. Any other film is better in my opinion. . . .
Dear Chris,

I'd certainly agree but fortunately for Fuji there were many who did/do like the beastly stuff, and I've had a couple of decent pictures from it myself.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2018   #13
css9450
Registered User
 
css9450's Avatar
 
css9450 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,849
Quote:
Originally Posted by samuelphoto View Post
B&H and Adorama are completely out.
Wow, you're not kidding! Its gone from B&H's website. Makes me think they're not taking any new orders; any new shipments go first to those who ordered during this past week when they were closed.

(They do have it in 620 size though...)
__________________
Nikon S2, S3, F, F2, F3, FM2, FA, N90S, D80, D7000, D750, Sony a6000, Canon IIf, Leica CL, Tower type 3, Zorki 4, Vito B, Perkeo II, Rollei 35....
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2018   #14
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by znapper View Post
That's funny, Foma also claim that their 100 ISO film is 100 and their 400 ISO film is 400, which they aren't in reality.

Delta gives paler lips on my models than Acros, which, again, gives paler lips than Foma. This is one of the more important aspects when i shoot, so that it why I tend to prefer certain films over the others.

Foma may _claim_ their red-sensitivity is such and such, but in reality (and luckily), my experience is that it really isn't, i get consistently darker lips on models with Foma, interpret that as you may.

In my experience, Ilford, Fuji and Kodak is usually much more consistent and correct in their charts than Fomapan.
Yes, Foma do (or at least did) get a bit creative with developer choices for ISO speeds, but that is allowed under ISO rules. About 20 years ago I actually plotted D/Log E curves for Foma 200, and found that it is all but identical to Ilford FP4 Plus in most developers, including a couple of speed increasing developers which put it close enough to ISO 200 to allow it to be sold as such. Which is exactly what they showed on their spec sheet.

Why would they lie about red sensitivity? Sure, it's possible that they changed sensitizing dyes without updating the spectrography, but it seems more than a little unlikely. And in any case, blue filtration will knock back red sensitivity and darken lips: higher red sensitivity means paler lips, not lighter which is what you are saying unless I am misreading you.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2018   #15
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta View Post
Film stocks are like dogs. A film stock you have grown to like is like a dog you have grown to love. When he’s gone he can be “replaced”, but never duplicated, and it will never be the same.
Perfect analogy.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2018   #16
znapper
Registered User
 
znapper's Avatar
 
znapper is offline
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 402
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
Why would they lie about red sensitivity? Sure, it's possible that they changed sensitizing dyes without updating the spectrography, but it seems more than a little unlikely. And in any case, blue filtration will knock back red sensitivity and darken lips: higher red sensitivity means paler lips, not lighter which is what you are saying unless I am misreading you.

Cheers,

R.
I get less pale lips (darker on the final photo) with Foma 100, that's what I am saying.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2018   #17
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by znapper View Post
I get less pale lips (darker on the final photo) with Foma 100, that's what I am saying.
OK, I was misunderstanding you. Sorry. No, I can't explain it.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2018   #18
KM-25
Registered User
 
KM-25's Avatar
 
KM-25 is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,669
I have had great luck with Acros but I really only use it for fast changing low light, primarily when it its going from evening to night and especially when weather plays a role.

I find that kind of light to be incredible to work in and really makes the whole idea of tonal nuances easily take a back seat to the resulting photographs.

As far as replacing it, I use a fair amount of Tmax 100 and 400 and even some Pan-F so I will roll with that. I ought to be good to go on Acros for a number of years if I stick to it's special purpose use though, I will have about 500 rolls of it in 120 once my orders come in this week.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2018   #19
RJ-
Whole Plate Photographer
 
RJ- is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London, England
Posts: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Legge View Post
Others may want something else from this thread, but what I'd like are suggestions for:

- A film/developer pair with starting point suggestions for development times to replace Acros.
- Film available in 35mm and 120
- Ideally a pair with a reasonable price (some of the suggestions I've seen are 2-3x more expensive than Acros/Rodinal). I know this will vary by region.
- Bonus points if there is a 200-400 speed film that works with the developer.

I'm hoping others find this thread useful and that we're able to keep it separate from the main Acros thread. Lots of us used Acros for various reasons. Having a dedicated space to sort out replacements would be helpful.

Hi Brian,

I'm sorry to hear Fujifilm has no longer been able to fight against the tide of digital commercialisation and wipeout of their film based presence. Fuji Acros has its unique characteristics which has made it my favourite 4x5inch sheet format and half-plate format film as well as 120 roll film.

Thinking about your replacement for Acros challenge, perhaps this depends on which angle a photographer comes to value Acros. It's hard to detract from Fuji Acros' superiority with extreme reciprocity failure control - which none of the remaining film offer on a par. I love its flexibility in use alongside its super fine grain characteristics, although its tonality is probably the reason I like it most [almost exclusively now with FX39 and Perceptol developer, but not at the same time].

I can't think of any black and white film which surpasses Fuji Acros in this regard, and would love to know. It is the film for night photographers and long slow exposure in the making. Perhaps we have to move on (celebrating what has been great about having lived to shoot with Fuji Acros) and make the most of what is left.

What is left?

Its fine grain and its unusually - near vintage - rendition of skin tones (described confusingly by Fujifilm as orthopanchromatic) isn't very well mirrored in modern TMax or Delta 100 emulsions. I've had to use TMax100 in whole plate format, due to shortage of Ilford FP4+ (limited annual run only) and find it's just okay. The Delta 100 strays furthest from the tonal scale of Fuji Acros in this respect. Either of these modern grained film offer a fine grain alternative - however not on a par with tonal scale alternative, in the same way that neither offer the same reciprocity failure benefits. You can play around with developers to get micro-differences.

Thinking about Ilford FP4+, its' tonal scale characteristics are very malleable in the darkroom: you use rodinal dilutions; I find this very beautiful, as well as using Ilford Perceptol (to dissolve the medium grain of Ilford FP4+) - the Perceptol combination offers less of the grainy FP4+ look in smaller formats and a lovely tonality. You can mask its grain using Pyro development techniques too - ultimately its grain structure makes it less like Fuji Acros, even if its speed is close (faster).

Rollei 80S (similar ISO to Fuji Acros) has a gorgeous tonal scale. Are you familiar with this film?

Perhaps, it appears more like the former Agfa APX100 to my eyes when developed in Rodinal 1:50 to 1:70 dilutions. It neither has Fuji Acros' reciprocity characteristics, and its tonal scale is bold, rich in mid-tone silver transitions with finer grain than Ilford FP4+. The disadvantage of this film is that its lack of an anti-curl layer, drives photographers spare with springing coils of film bouncing around the darkroom. It makes up for this in medium format where it is easier to cut off individual negatives. One added advantage, is that the Rollei 80S is a near-infrared film with IR715nm sensitivity, which allows the photographers' models to celebrate using green lipstick again, just like in the great era of film photography, in order to stop red lips from ghosting out.

Shanghai 100 speed film is a tradition emulsion - lacking all the above features of modern T grain or cubic grain film; lacking in reciprocity failure although its tonal scale is alright. It can be developed in Rodinal which you like (I presume, you are referring the latter RO9 formulation). It is fine in divided developers and Pyro based developers too. Similar films from Freestyle (USA), Lucky (China) and cut downs from Foma (EU) at 100 speeds are all traditional 100 speed type medium grain films - none of which will even approximate the characteristics of Fuji Acros when used competently.

Rollei RPX100 is worth trying (not as curly) - I have limited experience with this film, preferring the RPX25 instead (Rodinal again) which may be too slow, given your preference for medium speed film. I like KM-25' reference to the Ilford Pan F+ too - although I tend to work this at ISO 32 (even slower..!) instead of ISO 50 - if you can tolerate low ISO and work with it, it develops beautifully in Perceptol (fine grain developer) rated below its box speed - the image tonality is very pleasing, as is the fine grain. Still no reciprocity failure control however.

Rollei Superpan (similar to the 100 ISO budget films) and more grainy than Retro 80S, is perhaps not as interesting as Kodak Tri-X' tonal range. Tri-X is a great film with huge latitude and flexibility - however still no reciprocity failure comparison to Fuji Acros.

I guess there are other rebranded types of film suitable for replacement, depending on which characteristics of Fuji Acros can be abandoned foremost. I work with mostly slow emulsion: Fuji Acros is probably one of the fastest emulsions (!) whereas perhaps as a street photographer, you would find anything slower, compromising. As unlikely as it seems, Ilford Pan F+, FP4+ are probably the films which are easier to tolerate in the face of Fuji Acros' discontinuation. Rollei 80S is very particular in handling, although worthwhile with perseverance. RPX25 is lovely. If you can't decide, Kodak Tmax or Delta 100 swing it for enlargement factor.

Kind regards,
RJ
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2018   #20
charjohncarter
Registered User
 
charjohncarter's Avatar
 
charjohncarter is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Danville, CA, USA
Posts: 8,645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freakscene View Post
Foma 100 has vastly *more* red sensitivity than Acros:
http://www.foma.cz/en/fomapan-100
https://www.fujifilmusa.com/shared/b...anAcros100.pdf

TMX is closest in grain. Both TMX and Delta 100 can be similar tonally with careful choice of developer. Both TMX and Delta 100 need heavy filtration to get a similar spectral response, with a large attendant loss of speed. Neither have reciprocity characteristics anything like as good as Acros but TMX is better than Delta 100 in this regard:
http://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites...6_TMax_100.pdf
https://www.ilfordphoto.com/amfile/f...roduct_id/679/

So, as usual, there is no direct replacement, in this case unsurprisingly, because Acros is an idiosyncratic product.

Marty
Thank you for these Spectral Curves they really tell the story. I will add the ilford FP4+ Spectral curve as it has also been discussed. Either read them and weep, or find one that you think suits you and try it.

https://www.theimagingwarehouse.com/...020004/FP4.pdf

Of course, there is the possibility that Fuji will sell the process or reignite it as a special product.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2018   #21
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 8,265
Still some ACROS listed as in stock at Fotoimpex, 135 only tho.
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2018   #22
charjohncarter
Registered User
 
charjohncarter's Avatar
 
charjohncarter is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Danville, CA, USA
Posts: 8,645
I certainly am not an expert of Spectral Sensitivity Curves, but here are my impressions:

Delta 100 and FP4+ are very similar to each other, but appear to be less sensitive to blues (400 nm) than Acros 100. This makes the Ilford slightly more likely to need a yellow or more filter for rendering blue sky.

Tmax 100 is less sensitive to reds than Acros 100(+ for TMX portraits) but this seems slight. Tmax 100 is much more sensitive to blue (400nm and less nm) than Acros 100 which is good for sky.

These SSC are all done under different conditions so who knows what you will get with your developers. My personal experience is Acros and Agfa APX 100 were the closest, but both gone. (I never looked at the SSC of Agfa APX 100)

I hope someone with more knowledge than I have will rip my analysis apart and give use the real story of tonality.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2018   #23
Freakscene
Deregistered user
 
Freakscene's Avatar
 
Freakscene is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: In exile
Posts: 1,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by charjohncarter View Post
These SSC are all done under different conditions so who knows what you will get with your developers. My personal experience is Acros and Agfa APX 100 were the closest, but both gone. (I never looked at the SSC of Agfa APX 100)
It's here: https://125px.com/docs/film/agfa/apx100.pdf (Thanks Tim).

Acros is less sensitive to red than APX100, but the curve shape is as important as is the relative sensitivity at specific points. The point where the spectral response becomes insignificant in any given photo is also important.

Quote:
Originally Posted by charjohncarter View Post
I hope someone with more knowledge than I have will rip my analysis apart and give use the real story of tonality.
All I can really add is that spectral sensitivity is a predominant influence of the density (tone) that a specific colour is recorded on B&W film, but tonality as a whole is influenced by a lot more things than spectral sensitivity, largely the density/characteristic curve of the film-developer combination, and, if you wet print, the paper-paper developer combination.

If spectral response is really important to you, you can replicate colour response with filters, but if you use Acros because of its reciprocity characteristics and grain-speed characteristics, you are going to be doing more waiting around once Acros has run out - filtering any of the alternatives to obtain a similar spectral response costs light.

Marty



Leica MP, Summilux 35mm ASPH. 1/[email protected] Acros @ EI80, Xtol 1+1.

Last edited by Freakscene : 01-03-2019 at 15:42. Reason: Spelling mistakes, as usual
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2018   #24
maigo
Registered User
 
maigo is offline
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Burnaby, BC, Canada
Posts: 292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta View Post
Film stocks are like dogs. A film stock you have grown to like is like a dog you have grown to love. When he’s gone he can be “replaced”, but never duplicated, and it will never be the same. Better not to attempt the impossible, but just love what is left on its own merits.
Barbara Streisand would agree.
"You can clone the look of a dog, but you can't clone the soul."

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/02/s...d-her-dog.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
---------------------------------
My Flickr Photostream
My Flickr Albums
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2018   #25
charjohncarter
Registered User
 
charjohncarter's Avatar
 
charjohncarter is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Danville, CA, USA
Posts: 8,645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freakscene View Post
It's here: https://125px.com/docs/film/agfa/apx100.pdf (Thanks Tim).

Across is less sensitive to red than APX100, but the curve shape is as important as is the relative sensitivity at specific points. The point where the spectral response becomes insignificant in any given photo is also important.



All I can really add is that spectral sensitivity is a predominant influence of the density (tone) that a specific colour is recorded on B&W film, but tonality as a whole is influenced by a lot more things than spectral sensitivity, largely the density/characteristic curve of the film-developer combination, and, if you wet print, the paper-paper developer combination.

If spectral response is really important to you, you can replicate colour response with filters, but if you use Acros because of its reciprocity characteristics and grain-speed characteristics, you are going to be doing more waiting around once Acros has run out - filtering any of the alternatives to obtain a similar spectral response costs light.

Marty



Leica MP, Summilux 35mm ASPH. 1/[email protected] Acros @ EI80, Xtol 1+1.

Thank you for your response, and I agree with you. I like TMAX 100 because it gives me the blue and red sensitivity I like but I have to say that I had to refine my developer, development, and agitation to get what I wanted. I appreciate your expertise, and again thank you. Of course, not many will care.

P.S. I liked Acros 100 but I personally can get easily what I want from TMAX 100. That is not a general statement it is my choice for film, developer, and more important development and exposure fine tuning, along with agitation scheme.

My last Acros 100 roll:

Neopan Acros 100 expired by John Carter, on Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2018   #26
dave lackey
Registered User
 
dave lackey's Avatar
 
dave lackey is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 8,898
Nice, John!

In the last three years, I have been very pleased with the results with Acros.
I am stunned to hear so many negative comments about this film, tbh... however, I have, since then, been enamored with Double X which is my favorite at the moment.

Meanwhile back at the ranch, while I dial in HP5+ with the Baby Rolleiflex, I am also looking forward to trying FP4+. There are so many things I want to work on but time is so restricted.

John, keep posting!
__________________


Dave
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2018   #27
Freakscene
Deregistered user
 
Freakscene's Avatar
 
Freakscene is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: In exile
Posts: 1,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by charjohncarter View Post
Thank you for your response
Neopan Acros 100 expired by John Carter, on Flickr
You are very welcome. Lovely family shot.



Marty
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2018   #28
charjohncarter
Registered User
 
charjohncarter's Avatar
 
charjohncarter is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Danville, CA, USA
Posts: 8,645
Above was taken on a very overcast day. That is something that is not common in California. Acros 100, although I never used it much, was very good, at least for me under these conditions.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2018   #29
BernardL
Registered User
 
BernardL is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 130
Quote:
Freakscene
Foma 100 has vastly *more* red sensitivity than Acros:
http://www.foma.cz/en/fomapan-100
https://www.fujifilmusa.com/shared/b...anAcros100.pdf
Keep in mind that the Fuji spectrogram is witht a 5400K source, while the Foma spectrogram is with a 2850K source, which has *vastly* more energy in the red region of the spectrum. Ilford likewise uses a 2850K source. Even the temperature of the source is not enough to insure identical conditions, the dispersion law must also be specified (prism, grating?). Kodak provides a fully specified sensitivity curve, i.e. how many energy units per unit film area, at each respective wavelength, is needed to produce a reference net density, e.g; D=1 above B+F.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-09-2018   #30
valdas
Registered User
 
valdas is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,368
deleted...
__________________
My Flickr
________
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-10-2018   #31
valdas
Registered User
 
valdas is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,368
deleted...
__________________
My Flickr
________
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-10-2018   #32
Freakscene
Deregistered user
 
Freakscene's Avatar
 
Freakscene is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: In exile
Posts: 1,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by BernardL View Post
Keep in mind that the Fuji spectrogram is witht a 5400K source, while the Foma spectrogram is with a 2850K source, which has *vastly* more energy in the red region of the spectrum. Ilford likewise uses a 2850K source. Even the temperature of the source is not enough to insure identical conditions, the dispersion law must also be specified (prism, grating?). Kodak provides a fully specified sensitivity curve, i.e. how many energy units per unit film area, at each respective wavelength, is needed to produce a reference net density, e.g; D=1 above B+F.
Of course, there is about 3x as much red light as blue at 2850k, and slightly more blue than red at 5400k, but on a log scale that isn't that big a difference. I've measured spectral sensitivity for both films with a recording spectrograph and the higher red sensitivity in Foma 100 is real, and irrespective of the shape of the response the extinction point for the Foma is substantially further into the red.

One thing I've just noticed now is that Foma's sensitivity curve for Foma 200 in current technical data appears identical to their curve for Foma 100, whereas in my tests Foma 200 had a quite different response.

Agree entirely that Kodak's method, which is closer to equal intensity across the spectrum. One of the things that makes me uncomfortable about Kodak doing badly as a company is that they do this type of technical data so well.

Marty

Last edited by Freakscene : 01-03-2019 at 15:43. Reason: Spelling, again
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-10-2018   #33
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 659
Wow, Rollei films are just about double the cost of Acros. Unreal.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-10-2018   #34
Larry Cloetta
Registered User
 
Larry Cloetta is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jackson, WY
Age: 69
Posts: 1,420
Can’t help but notice in this thread and others that, when some have a personal preference for the tonality of a given film stock, they can’t or won’t say “I prefer the tonality of x.” It’s always “x has better tonality.”
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-10-2018   #35
helenhill
Chasing Shadows ... Light
 
helenhill's Avatar
 
helenhill is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New Yawk
Posts: 5,491
For Acros... A Fuji Digital.
wink, wink

I'm a solid user of HP5 or Tmax 400
__________________
Flickr.

________________________
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-10-2018   #36
dave lackey
Registered User
 
dave lackey's Avatar
 
dave lackey is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 8,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta View Post
Can’t help but notice in this thread and others that, when some have a personal preference for the tonality of a given film stock, they can’t or won’t say “I prefer the tonality of x.” It’s always “x has better tonality.”
Well said... preferences are after all, preferences.
I not sure I have preferences anymore...

With the disappearance of Fuji b/w, the day will likely hasten when no one has preferences. No worries... I am just having fun with what we have to work with today. I liked Kodachrome. It is gone. I liked all the b/w that is now gone. But, seriously, I can make the rest of the way.
__________________


Dave
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-10-2018   #37
KM-25
Registered User
 
KM-25's Avatar
 
KM-25 is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave lackey View Post
Well said... preferences are after all, preferences.
I not sure I have preferences anymore...

With the disappearance of Fuji b/w, the day will likely hasten when no one has preferences. No worries... I am just having fun with what we have to work with today. I liked Kodachrome. It is gone. I liked all the b/w that is now gone. But, seriously, I can make the rest of the way.
Fuji is discontinuing films, not Kodak and Ilford so I would put more optimism into your viewplane. We will have enough choices in B&W for years to come. Now if you are a dabbler or someone who relies on the film’s characteristics rather than substantial light and subject matter, your box of chocolates may have a reduced selection.

If all I had was one film to use, I would be just fine.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-10-2018   #38
lawrence
Registered User
 
lawrence's Avatar
 
lawrence is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 2,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by helenhill View Post
For Acros... A Fuji Digital.
wink, wink
Helen, I agree. Someone else mentioned that of all the films around today Acros looks the most 'digital', however to my eyes it doesn't look totally digital and has (had?) its own characteristics, quite different from TMX and D100. Whatever you may think of Acros as a film, it's sad to see another one bite the dust.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-10-2018   #39
PRJ
Another Day in Paradise
 
PRJ's Avatar
 
PRJ is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 279
Not a fan of Acros but I've used it and made some good prints with it. I stopped using it because I knew that Fuji would eventually discontinue it after they killed off Neopan 400. I went back to HP5. I am talking about 120 and 4x5 so the grain difference isn't really relevant.

Film is what you make it so pretty much anything works if you learn how to use it. It is inconvenient though when a film that you have become accustomed to disappears and you have to start from scratch. I've been there numerous times since Agfa went under.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-13-2018   #40
Freakscene
Deregistered user
 
Freakscene's Avatar
 
Freakscene is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: In exile
Posts: 1,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta View Post
Can’t help but notice in this thread and others that, when some have a personal preference for the tonality of a given film stock, they can’t or won’t say “I prefer the tonality of x.” It’s always “x has better tonality.”
One thing about having worked in a professional B&W film lab that offered custom development is that whatever I like or don't like, I needed to learn how to get the best out of all films, and also how to modify those optima for particular clients. It's why I spent a lot of time learning what factors contributed to different film tonalities. As David Vestal said "in art, anything goes".

Marty
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 16:08.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.