Bluefire Police film?
David Nebenzahl
cameras]
So has anyone used this Bluefire "Police" film? See
http://www.frugalphotographer.com/catBluefire.htm
Is this basically the same as the Gigabit stuff? Is it any good? Is it
worth messing with?
--
Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress
blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?
- harvested from Usenet
Peter Irwin
> [Using r.p.e.35mm for its intended purpose--discussions of 35mm FILM
> cameras]
>
> So has anyone used this Bluefire "Police" film? See
> http://www.frugalphotographer.com/catBluefire.htm
>
> Is this basically the same as the Gigabit stuff? Is it any good? Is it
> worth messing with?
I haven't tried that one, but as far as I know all such things
are high speed source document microfilms plus some variation
on POTA developer.
If you can find someone to sell you a modest quantity of
Agfa Copex or Kodak Imagelink films in 35mm double perf,
you could do it a lot cheaper. Most microfilm sellers seem
to want to sell film by the case, and I'm not aware of anyone
who will currently sell me a single 100 foot roll. It is very
cheap by the case, and I wish B&H or someone would sell a single
100 foot roll for double their cost, but they don't.
16mm film and unperforated 35 is easier to find in small
quantities, but the perforated stuff that fits our cameras
seems to be the least common of the standard formats for microfilming.
Peter.
--
pir...@ktb.net
Annika1980
> [Using r.p.e.35mm for its intended purpose--discussions of 35mm FILM
> cameras]
>
>
> Is this basically the same as the Gigabit stuff? Is it any good? Is it
> worth messing with?
Dude, just get the new Fabulous 1D4. It shoots in the dark.
ISO 102,400, baby!
Murray
> [Using r.p.e.35mm for its intended purpose--discussions of 35mm FILM
> cameras]
>
> So has anyone used this Bluefire "Police" film? See
> http://www.frugalphotographer.com/catBluefire.htm
>
> Is this basically the same as the Gigabit stuff? Is it any good? Is it
> worth messing with?
>
>
developer, a so-called 'variation' on the Holden & Weichert formula
of 35 years ago. You can make that yourself (I did) and if you
make the active ingredient part with glycol/glycerol/brake fluid
(yes!) it will keep fine in the fridge. Just make sure you
remember how much of what goes with that to get the final
dilution. The numbers are weird.
As to what to do with it depends if you're a 'grainless' friek.
There is none. But it can still be hard to get pictorial
results. The phenidone can cause banding of areas of almost
constant tone, such as skies. Damned irritating.
I bought a can of 35mm, and 16mm for the Minoltas/Kiev miniature
cameras and still have a bunch.
There are those who swear by C41 developer. Haven't been
down that road yet but am considering Dignan's split C41
formula for just this film. Got the makin's just haven't
done it yet. Lots of cameras and film - so little time.
:-) Good luck you will get lots of experience with occult
developer formulae.
Murray
Thor Lancelot Simon
Murray <m...@erewhon.com.au> wrote:
>
>As to what to do with it depends if you're a 'grainless' friek.
>There is none. But it can still be hard to get pictorial
>results. The phenidone can cause banding of areas of almost
>constant tone, such as skies. Damned irritating.
I wonder whether, at this late date, it would be possible to persuade
Kodak to divulge the formula for Technidol.
--
Thor Lancelot Simon t...@rek.tjls.com
"Even experienced UNIX users occasionally enter rm *.* at the UNIX
prompt only to realize too late that they have removed the wrong
segment of the directory structure." - Microsoft WSS whitepaper
David Nebenzahl
> In article <1vKdnQxfq51jmHbX...@westnet.com.au>,
> Murray <m...@erewhon.com.au> wrote:
>
>> As to what to do with it depends if you're a 'grainless' friek.
>> There is none. But it can still be hard to get pictorial results.
>> The phenidone can cause banding of areas of almost constant tone,
>> such as skies. Damned irritating.
>
> I wonder whether, at this late date, it would be possible to persuade
> Kodak to divulge the formula for Technidol.
Hmm; Richard M? Any thoughts?
David Nebenzahl
> I wonder whether, at this late date, it would be possible to persuade
> Kodak to divulge the formula for Technidol.
Sorry, wrong newsgroup; that should be Richard *K*. (M is a guru from
another NG.)
Nicholas O. Lindan
> I wonder whether, at this late date, it would be possible to persuade
> Kodak to divulge the formula for Technidol.
That would be lovely.
Whatever it is, it isn't POTA, more like H&W Control. The ingredients:
1) Diethylene Glycol:
diluent
2) Hydroquinone:
developing agent
3) Diethanolamine sulfur dioxide complex:
alkali/activator?
Carbonate substitute? Kodak loves the stuff.
4) Tris (1-methylethyl) naphthalene sulfonic acid sodium salt:
wetting agent/developing agent(?)
5) 1-Phenyl-4, 4-dimethyl-3-pyrazolidinone:
AKA Dimezone, phenidone-like developing agent
I am taking a guess at the reasons for the DEA-SO2 and naptha-sulfonic salt.
Anyone with any more clues?
--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters
http://www.darkroomautomation.com/da-main.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com
Thor Lancelot Simon
Nicholas O. Lindan <s...@sig.com> wrote:
>
>3) Diethanolamine sulfur dioxide complex:
> alkali/activator?
> Carbonate substitute? Kodak loves the stuff.
>
>4) Tris (1-methylethyl) naphthalene sulfonic acid sodium salt:
> wetting agent/developing agent(?)
I wonder if this last one is even available any more. Eastman Chemical
used to make a lot of stuff strictly for in-house use...
Thor
Noons
> On 10/30/2009 8:17 AM Thor Lancelot Simon spake thus:
>
>> I wonder whether, at this late date, it would be possible to persuade
>> Kodak to divulge the formula for Technidol.
>
> Sorry, wrong newsgroup; that should be Richard *K*. (M is a guru from
> another NG.)
Anyone in APUG would possibly know?
I'm still finding Technidol in a number of local shops. Stashing it away in
large quantities at the mo: used with Adox CMS20, I get stunning results.
Adox makes their own developer for their film but Technidol works brilliantly as
well.
Murray
> "Thor Lancelot Simon" <t...@panix.com> wrote
>
>> I wonder whether, at this late date, it would be possible to persuade
>> Kodak to divulge the formula for Technidol.
>
> That would be lovely.
>
> Whatever it is, it isn't POTA, more like H&W Control. The ingredients:
>
> 1) Diethylene Glycol:
> diluent
>
> 2) Hydroquinone:
> developing agent
>
> 3) Diethanolamine sulfur dioxide complex:
> alkali/activator?
> Carbonate substitute? Kodak loves the stuff.
>
> 4) Tris (1-methylethyl) naphthalene sulfonic acid sodium salt:
> wetting agent/developing agent(?)
>
> 5) 1-Phenyl-4, 4-dimethyl-3-pyrazolidinone:
> AKA Dimezone, phenidone-like developing agent
>
> I am taking a guess at the reasons for the DEA-SO2 and naptha-sulfonic salt.
> Anyone with any more clues?
I poured it into the tank - it was 8.8. This surprised me as
plain DEA has a pH higher than TEA. The SO2 may pull it down.
The colour of the spent developer even after 7 mins was brown and I
expected it to be pinkish if penidone (Dimezone) was the
main agent. Didn't know about the HQ altho it could be a
substitute for catechol which IIRC was thought to be in
Technidol originally. I have no data on that.
How active is HQ at pH 8.8?
Getting to be like alchemy.
Murray
Grimly Curmudgeon
drugs began to take hold. I remember David Nebenzahl
<nob...@but.us.chickens> saying something like:
>[Using r.p.e.35mm for its intended purpose--discussions of 35mm FILM
>cameras]
>
>So has anyone used this Bluefire "Police" film? See
>http://www.frugalphotographer.com/catBluefire.htm
>
>Is this basically the same as the Gigabit stuff? Is it any good? Is it
>worth messing with?
Also, try this. I was sure,last time I looked, they had 100' rolls of
it, but perhaps not.
http://www.lumiere-shop.de/index.php/cat/c430_ADOX-CMS-20-Film.html