Do you feel Lucky?

Seriously, anyone have any comments on their film? I saw their ISO 100
color film in a store today. I probably should have bought it, but did not.
(It wasn't a camera store).

Is their black and white film any good? Is it worth persuing?

Thanks,

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel (E-Mail Removed) N3OWJ/4X1GM


Geoffrey S. Mendelson

On 9/14/2008 1:14 PM Geoffrey S. Mendelson spake thus:

> Seriously, anyone have any comments on their film? I saw their ISO 100
> color film in a store today. I probably should have bought it, but did not.
> (It wasn't a camera store).
>
> Is their black and white film any good? Is it worth persuing?

Dunno.

Buy a roll, shoot it, get it printed. And look at the negatives; you'll
probably be able to ID the manufacturer. (I bought some off-off-brand
color negative film a few years ago for about a buck a roll that turned
out to be made by Agfa. There are only a few manufacturers out there.)


--
Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the
powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral.

- Paulo Freire

On 9/14/2008 1:14 PM Geoffrey S. Mendelson spake thus:

> Seriously, anyone have any comments on their film? I saw their ISO 100
> color film in a store today. I probably should have bought it, but did not.
> (It wasn't a camera store).
>
> Is their black and white film any good? Is it worth persuing?

Aaaargh, should have put brain in gear before engaging mouth. It occurs
to me you're talking about Chinese film, correct? (I was assuming
American, German or Japanese.)


--
Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the
powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral.

- Paulo Freire

Geoffrey S. Mendelson <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Seriously, anyone have any comments on their film? I saw their ISO 100
> color film in a store today. I probably should have bought it, but did not.
> (It wasn't a camera store).
>
> Is their black and white film any good? Is it worth persuing?
>
I bought 10 rolls of Lucky SHD-100 B&W film a few years ago.

The best thing about the film is that it came in reloadable
135 magazines which are better than the ones I've seen for sale
lately. They might even be as good as the ones Kodak used to
have before they started crimping the ends. These are well made
and they come apart nicely in the darkroom when I give the knob
a firm tap on the table. (The ones from Maco are not nearly as nice.)

The film base is very clear, not grey. Grain is pretty fine,
normal for a conventional 100 speed film - much finer than
Svema 100. The emulsion seems to get scratch marks much more
easily than modern capitalist films. I've never had a problem
with Kodak, Ilford, Fuji or Agfa.

Peter.
--
(E-Mail Removed)

On 9/14/2008 3:48 PM John J spake thus:

> Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
>
>> Seriously, anyone have any comments on their film? I saw their ISO 100
>> color film in a store today. I probably should have bought it, but did not.
>> (It wasn't a camera store).
>
> Who's film?

I dunno; are you film?

Oh, you meant "whose film"?


--
Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the
powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral.

- Paulo Freire

On 9/14/2008 3:39 PM Peter Irwin spake thus:

> Geoffrey S. Mendelson <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Seriously, anyone have any comments on their film? I saw their ISO 100
>> color film in a store today. I probably should have bought it, but did not.
>> (It wasn't a camera store).
>
> The film base is very clear, not grey. Grain is pretty fine,
> normal for a conventional 100 speed film - much finer than
> Svema 100. The emulsion seems to get scratch marks much more
> easily than modern capitalist films. I've never had a problem
> with Kodak, Ilford, Fuji or Agfa.

Ah, comrade, if you're getting scratches, the problem is your capitalist
camera, not the people's film.


--
Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the
powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral.

- Paulo Freire

John J wrote:
> David Nebenzahl wrote:
>> On 9/14/2008 3:48 PM John J spake thus:
>>
>>> Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
>> >
>>>> Seriously, anyone have any comments on their film? I saw their ISO 100
>>>> color film in a store today. I probably should have bought it, but
>>>> did not.
>>>> (It wasn't a camera store).
>>> Who's film?
>> I dunno; are you film?
>>
>> Oh, you meant "whose film"?
>
> No, no! Who's on first base.

Right.

--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 22:20:01 up 39 days, 4:26, 3 users, load average: 4.01, 4.03, 4.04

On 9/14/2008 7:14 PM John J spake thus:

> David Nebenzahl wrote:
>
>> On 9/14/2008 3:48 PM John J spake thus:
>>
>>> Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
>> >
>>>> Seriously, anyone have any comments on their film? I saw their ISO 100
>>>> color film in a store today. I probably should have bought it, but
>>>> did not.
>>>> (It wasn't a camera store).
>>>
>>> Who's film?
>>
>> I dunno; are you film?
>>
>> Oh, you meant "whose film"?
>
> No, no! Who's on first base.

What's on second.


--
Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the
powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral.

- Paulo Freire

"Richard Knoppow" <(E-Mail Removed)> schrieb:
>"Peter Irwin" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message

>> The film base is very clear, not grey.

>If you are referring to 35mm B&W film being on a clear
>base it may be that Lucky is coating an anti-halation
>coating under the emulsion.

They are not. And it´s the main flaw I found with these films.

>The location of the coating makes it
>function as an anti-light-piping coating as well eliminating
>the need for pigmenting the support.

A friend of mine demonstrated that you could read a newspaper through
the undeveloped film

Worse is the photographic result - the lack of a anti-halation coating
(AHU) contributes to halos and an overall unsharp appearance of the
negativ under certain lighting conditions - like with a glaring piece
of chrome or metal or the sun within the frame.

Kodak pulled out of the Joint venture with Lucky some time ago.

Gruss,
Roman
--
"An MDCCCXII/Mémorable par la campagne contre les Russes/
Sous le préfectura de Jules Doazan."
"Vu et approuvé par nous commandant russe de la ville de Coblentz/
le 1er janvier 1814."

On 9/16/2008 5:39 AM Roman J. Rohleder spake thus:

> "Richard Knoppow" <(E-Mail Removed)> schrieb:
>
>>If you are referring to 35mm B&W film being on a clear
>>base it may be that Lucky is coating an anti-halation
>>coating under the emulsion.
>
> They are not. And it´s the main flaw I found with these films.
>
>>The location of the coating makes it
>>function as an anti-light-piping coating as well eliminating
>>the need for pigmenting the support.
>
> A friend of mine demonstrated that you could read a newspaper through
> the undeveloped film
>
> Worse is the photographic result - the lack of a anti-halation coating
> (AHU) contributes to halos and an overall unsharp appearance of the
> negativ under certain lighting conditions - like with a glaring piece
> of chrome or metal or the sun within the frame.

Hmm; sounds like while the film may not be good for typical pictoral
rendition, it might be suitable for arty shots that exploit such flaws.
Would be interesting to see what the results are shooting such a scene
with bright spots.


--
Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the
powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral.

- Paulo Freire