Wolf_XL
...and how long should I soak the CHM 100 in the FX-39? I can’t find any information on this – neither online nor in the packaging. Digitaltruth doesn’t have any information either... Any ideas???
Lichtjahr
...if you can read, read on...
“
Quote from Fotoimpex’s film description:
“
‘CHM 100 can be exposed and developed in exactly the same way as APX 100 “NEW”, RPX 100 and Kentmere 100.’
“
Life can be that simple :spudnikheadstand:
Wolf_XL
...not at all – digitaltruth doesn’t distinguish between APX and APX New, and as far as the RPX films are concerned, I’ve noticed for myself that there appear to be two different emulsions in circulation. And Kentmere – see screenshot. I now know what the development time for FX-39 is, but this time differs significantly from the time digitaltruth specifies for the RPX (5.5 mins vs. 7.5 mins). Which, incidentally, would confirm my suspicion about the different RPX emulsions...
€
P.S.
€
...and to add to the confusion, the film box states that the film can be exposed at 160 ASA in the FX-39 – yeah, yeah, life’s that simple... :lol:€
grommi
Yes, the RPX films in particular are, unfortunately, a tiresome issue. One has to assume that all current Harman/Ilford OEM films are now absolutely identical to Kentmere 100 and 400, i.e. CHM, APXnew, RPX and whatever else might be out there. The RPX films have therefore become dispensable to me.
€
As for the Agfaphoto (not AGFA!!) APX films, the ‘new’ has now been dropped; they are now simply called APX and are identical to the Kentmere films, as can also be seen from the 10-minute development time for the 100 in Rodinal 1+50. I have compared the Kentmere and Agfaphoto APX films myself; they are identical twins. The current RPX 400 is also now identical to Kentmere 400.
€
The original AGFA Leverkusen films no longer appear to be listed in the Massive Devchart. It explicitly mentions “Agfaphoto”, and that is not the old AGFA. The times for Silvermax and Scala leave me a bit puzzled; they should actually be identical to the old AGFA APX 100, shouldn’t they?
€
With the APX 100 (new), I actually get almost a true 200 ASA in Caffenol-C; the 160 in FX 39 seems plausible to me.
Wolf_XL
...I’ve now developed the film in FX-39 at 7:30 – and it looks very good to me. The camera was set to 100 ASA – and from the looks of it, I would definitely have been way off the mark if I’d used 160 ASA...
