Probably..
HP5 has wonderful tonality under the right light (sunny/directional) It's has less contrast than Tri-X and the grain is tighter too. I'll probably stick with Tri-X and FP4 for now, both seem to handle diafine better and is suitable for almost every lighting condition.
FA's peer crit, where we have to tell our story to the whole class. Nerve-wracking if you're doing it alone, like Dhikong...good thing I'm in a group. Here you can see how poorly HP5 souped in diafine reacts to artificial lighting. Very low contrast, and compensating for it in post exaggerates the grain. Tri-X would be better in situations like this.
Definitely not the right combo for flat lighting..
Back to Tri-X..wonderful :)
Thumbnails for our FYP. Acap, Adit and Ghazi handling the bulk of the drawings..lucky to have them cause I can't draw cartoons to save my life.
Maybe I really do need a 50 :) A planar would be nice..
My M6 is starting to act up, problem with the rewind knob where the film advance will jam whenever I reach midroll. It seems others have faced this problem as well, and there are diy instructions on how to fix this. Don't know if I would it myself..might send it to Solms and get an MP viewfinder upgrade as well.
Makes for some interesting scans though..
Studio session..
And that's it. I'll probably continue with my M8 for now..at least until I figure out what to do with the M6.
Cheers!
I am wasting my many rolls of HP5 I got very very cheap now, too. Would have been even cheaper to buy Tri-X at normal price (like three times what i paid for the HP5) for the same yield of good photos. HP5 is good in sunlight and with a flash, Tri-X is usable in many more situations.
ReplyDeleteMy thoughts exactly! I've recently scanned in some rolls shot with HP5 (+ID11) in harsh sunlight and the tonality is gorgeous. Definitely something I'll come back to again if the prices are right and the lighting conditions match..
ReplyDelete