Kodak HIE Exposure

mysteryscribe · May 28, 2006

for a change just what i wrote lol usually it is typo city with me

terri · May 29, 2006

James: I don't know whether to laugh or cry after reading all that. So here: :hug:: do what you want with that! :lol:

I was bracing myself to read that the film had crimped badly once it had gotten wet prior to loading, but apparently you had success. :thumbup: Yeah, the film lacks the anihalation backing and is very thin stuff. Not easy to handle. I sort of hate it, actually. :mrgreen: Until I pull a great print, then it all disappears!

If you came away from all that with usable frames, I'd have to call it a success! And next time it will be SO much easier. I'm looking forward to seeing them!

I've never been able to scan an HIE negative, btw - I have an Epson 2450 that stubbornly refuses to read those dense negatives. :grumpy:

You may have better luck than me, but I usually have to find time to make a print before I get any IR images uploaded here.

JamesD · May 29, 2006

I might have to try the neg scanner on my flatbed, then. Usually, it sucks. Badly. But it might work with good, dense negs. However, I'll be scanning prints, when I get them. I got one workable one, but the others didn't come out. I miscalculated the exposure, apparently.

I will tell you this: I got at least one that's going up to 6.5 X 9.75 (biggest I can print on 8X10 without cropping). And it's going on my wall. It may well be my first portfolio shot.

Why didn't you tell me this stuff has awsome grain?!

JamesD · May 29, 2006

As for Nightmare On HIE Street.... it wasn't as bad as that roll of Forte film I had the satanically-conceived misadventure with. I will NEVER use that **** again. (Asterisks my own). It bound up a foot into the roll and it yielded crap. And everything was DRY. It didn't wanna go into the camera right. It didn't wanna develop right.

(In fact, I'm tempted to add a few more asterisks. I've got a wide, creative vocabulary of them, and believe me, I applied a lot of them to that **** ******-*** FortePan.)

Oh, yeah: :madass:

:madmad:

benhasajeep · May 29, 2006

Sounds like quite an adventure with this roll.

Just chalk it up as experience learned.

terri · May 29, 2006

JamesD said:
I might have to try the neg scanner on my flatbed, then. Usually, it sucks. Badly. But it might work with good, dense negs. However, I'll be scanning prints, when I get them. I got one workable one, but the others didn't come out. I miscalculated the exposure, apparently.

I will tell you this: I got at least one that's going up to 6.5 X 9.75 (biggest I can print on 8X10 without cropping). And it's going on my wall. It may well be my first portfolio shot.

Why didn't you tell me this stuff has awsome grain?!

I figured you knew that, I guess. For some of us, that's half the allure of that stuff. :lol:

If you wanna get freaky with the grain, skip the TMax developer and go bold with D19. It's not for every image, but....woOt! You got grain.

mysteryscribe · May 30, 2006

I love it... For thrity plus years I fought to cut the grain to almost nothng. Digital come along with zero grain, and now we all want pleasing grain. We are just as nutty as they are lol...

terri · May 30, 2006

I have always liked a grainy B&W. It doesn't suit every image - portraiture and the like - but for the most part I love seeing it.

But then, I do bromoils, so it's obvious I'm not about crisp clean imagery, anyway. :lol: