On Tue, 16 Apr 2002 23:01:12 -0300 Roger Smith (rsmith@unb.ca) wrote:
> I have been curious to hear from a user of the SS4000, as to
> whether or not the pepper grain is prominent. I seem to remember that
> this scanner, unlike the Minoltas and Nikons, tends to show less of
> the dirt and film defects.
This sounds to me like mucky processing. I used to shoot a lot of XP1 which
had a magnetic attraction for processing filth. It was not uncommon for
entire films to exhibit an horrendous rash of minute particulate
contamination. I never pinned it down completely but came to conclusion it
was an interaction between the Ilford chemistry and my water quality, which
although filtered for particles, is high in carbonates and (being London)
GOK what else. Kodalk/Calgon or similar are typically used as water
softeners to counteract precipitation during development, I don't think the
Ilford XPI dev had enough of the stuff. But it was weirdly variable,
sometimes it happened, sometimes it didn't, so this may have been wrong. In
the end I switched to TMY.
The other time I've seen this sort of thing was with B&W. I had bought a
huge 5L of Photoflo 600, instead of the 1L Photoflo 200 I normally used. At
600:1 this was going to last probably the rest of my life! However, I think
it must have been allowed to get cold or something, because despite looking
totally clear, it was like giving the film a final rinse in salt solution -
millions of minute crystalline particles formed as the film dried. That
was the last time I ever used Kodaflo, I've used Ilfotol ever since without
problems - which is also less prone to the slight greasiness of Kodaflo
and almost never leaves drying marks.
Regards
Tony Sleep
- Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info
& comparisons
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
