On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Hans van Veluwen wrote:
> Maybe next time you should try the Fuji Press 800 or Kodak Supra 800, both
> pushed to 1600. They are less grainy than the HG1600, even when pushed.
The problem there is that you'll have to pay the lab their professional
rates for the push processing of C41, which tends to get very expensive
... like about 3 times the cost.
I've had some good results with Fuji HG1600 myself (might get around to
posting them sometime), just using the normal d&p service. Can't say
that the negs were any worse than the last lot I had done by a pro lab.
--
________________________________________________________________________
* | |
| / | |/-\ | Ian A. Nichols |
| | | | | | http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/~cpian/ |
| \-/| | / | i.a.nichols@xxxxxxxxxx |
| * iann@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|