Gigabit B&W Film

[Bobby Ironsights]

I looked at this article involving gigabit film, and am quite interested in it.
http://www.gigabitfilm.de/html/english/information/24x36/examples/examples_main.htm
Does anyone actually use it here? How are your feelings?

I'm a real film newb, so I'm looking for a combination of film and developer to start on, but....those results look SO fantastic!

 

[selmerdave]

My feeling is that it is a bunch of marketing b.s. Any photo (or part of a photo really) shot on an 8" x 10" negative that is anything but perfectly clear in a 288x400 pixel on-screen image - as in the last example on that page where no doubt they are suggesting the photo on the right is from the large format camera - has not been taken properly or not been displayed correctly. And anyone that is going to claim that any 35mm film is going to come even close to competing with a 6cm x 7cm negative, let alone an 8" x 10" negative, is about to sell you some swampland in Florida as the saying goes.

*Any* 35mm film (okay, 400 or slower) is going to give you resolution as fine as a computer monitor, so the whole idea of looking at a scan of an entire photo as a way of judging the quality of the film is a little rediculous. Properly scanned and digitally processed, any moderately slow film should look as good as those examples.

My guess is you are looking for a good, slow film. I'm sure many of the offerings at ISO 100 from Fuji, Kodak, Agfa and Ilford would give you very good results. Plus, if you look a little harder you can find stuff like Efke/Adox 25 to take that even further, or there's the Rollei 25 as well.

Dave

 

[Jeff Canes]

I’ve never used Gigabit. It I recall correctly it microfilm. That is the reason for the extreme fine grin. I know of two other brands that sale this type of film. They are Bluefire sold by Frugal Photographer and Adox CMS20 sold by J and C or Fotoimpex.

Also I read somewhere on net that Bluefire is the Gigabit and that Adox CMS20 is an Agfa film but manufactured by a German OEM supplier. Hex the two could be the same film

 

[markc]

If they were trying to show quality, you'd think they'd turn down the JPG compression. Those images have loads of artifacts. It's impossible to know if it's the film, the scan, or the processing, but I think they look like crap. There's no contrast, many blown out areas, etc., and this is on a balanced monitor.

 

[ThomThomsk]

I'm a real film newb, so I'm looking for a combination of film and developer to start on, but....those results look SO fantastic!

Gigabit is re-packaged Agfa Copex-Pan. No magic, and not as simple to handle as "normal" films.

Start with something mainstream. A conventional film like Ilford HP5+ or Kodak Tri-X, developed in ID-11 (Ilford fine grain developer) or D-76 (same thing from Kodak). Follow the manufacturer's instructions closely and you will get excellent results. One film, one developer, and get really comfortable with that before you move on to more unusal emulsions.

Thom

 

[ksmattfish]

It's microfilm. Great resolution with a ***** of a tonal scale. I think most of the examples look horrible. I think it could be usable, but would take lots of personal testing.