I wondered why the ADOX films weren't available in the 120 format. They would indeed be fantastic! I hope they can get their 120 machines running again. I've also come to like ADOX films, although I haven't shot much of them (mostly their newer HR-50 stuff). CMS 20 II is one of the cheaper ADOX films here in Germany, by the way, though Adotech is still very expensive. Great video, David! Looking forward to this series every time there is a new one.
You are going to love the next few months. 😃 I have some Kickstarter stuff to do today but will be developing a bunch of Delta 100, Delta 3200, and TMax 100 today.
I believe Adox is working on getting 120 in production again... at least they've said they are for 100 CHS II... so I suspect this will come back in 120 as well. Great review. I'll try this in 4x5 at some point. But I think my technique needs some further practice to make it a worthwhile investment.
It's so good that CMS20 is much less expensive here in Germany - because it's my favorite BW film for landscapes and a joy to scan and also print in the darkroom. Never tried 120 or 4x5 though ;) I tend to rate it at ISO12 with standard development given by the Adotech bottle and are quite happy with the most results. In very sunny or contrasty situations, I go down to ISO 8 without altering the development and the highlights are mostly retained and recoverable. The only thing I really don't like about CMS20 is it's enormous curliness ...
Thank you! For the curl, I was able to reduce that a bit by letting it hand with some fishing weights on the end of the roll for a few days and then storing it in a negative book with weight (other negative books) on top of it.
@@DavidHancock After keeping the strips in the folders for some weeks, the curl disappear ... but beware of forgetting them loose in the darkroom -> The Curl Rises Again
Always wondered how that film would look like. And how bad it would be not using Adox own chemistry. Thanks for filling in all those white spots in the map. Lots of work on your behalf.
I don’t know maybe it’s TH-cam but I like shadow detail in my images most of the time even if it is super sharp if there’s hardly any shadow details and a lot of the highlights seem blown out pretty badly in some of those images it doesn’t seem worth it to me. I’ll stick with Fuji Acros 100. Great information by the way about the film in your developer series.
Very impressive work. From its description it rem8nds me of Kodaks Tech Pan, which, after learning curve and exact developer, also produced 14x11 prints without grain. Thank you for your hard work
When I heard you say Adotech was expensive I cringed. Then I heard the prices you quoted and I thought I’d buy it by the case lot without blinking😝 Seriously, come live in SA for a while where we pay ZAR17 for U$1 and ZAR18 for €1…😉 Very much looking forward to playing with this stuff soon… Did you experiment with any filters for landscapes…red or yellow? Cheers!
An excellent video; I just wonder if you haven't so discouraged many from trying it that availability becomes an issue. For example, I understand there are labs that will use the ADOX chemicals, at least that was definitely true for Silvermax. I wrote to FOTOIMPEX toask if they knew of any near where I am located.
Thank you! I would say, for this film, it's one that really benefits from home developing because labs work in fast, strong chemistry (in general.) This is a film best used by advanced users with a good handle on their ability to develop this stock with good developing technique. I have a GREAT lab and I would definitely NOT send them this because they do all B&W in a 6-minute XTOL stock (or maybe 1+1) dip. This would not work well in that setting.
Why not simply agitate the 1:75? If your reason for stand developing is purely financial, not compensation, then there's no actual reason to need to leave it sitting still, you can agitate as much as you want and thus still save money but avoid all the bromide drag and whatnot. Just toss a film leader in there to rough out the time first with agitation. Also B&H sells Rollei Copex Rapid, which as far as I can tell is the same film as this, in 120.
Good question and it's a matter of the desired results. Agitation of any quantity in developing will increase negative contrast by replacing used chemistry with fresh. Stand developing will result in flatter negatives with better highlight and shadow detail. I do agree that bromide drag is a significant issue with stand developing and some chemistries and, when that's a concern, semi-stand is a good workaround.
his film is waste of money ! first of all, it's expensive for a black and white film, it's recommended to develop only in adotech 4 for best results, after drying , it curls, even if you keep it under heavy books, it's a pain working in darkroom with this film, and it's scratches easily ,it's not as sharp as they say. I made a side by side comparison, with an expired kodadk tmax100, ilford fp4, and astrum 64(for those who don't know what film is astrum 64, it's the former svema 64 )and the only difference that I noticed that the adox is slightly sharper, almost unnoticeable , it doesn't justifies the price, as for contrast and tones, astrum 64 is better, plus the spectral sensitivity of astrum FN-64 is expanded into the near infrared range of the energy spectrum, and it dries perfectly flat, and its more resistant to scratches and 3 times cheaper than adox, it can be developed with any developer. Here in Canada is $6.50 per roll.
I agree. To me, the biggest difference is that RPX 25 has a much greater dynamic range that can be obtained more easily. I've used some RPX 25, but I wouldn't say I'm an expert in it yet.
Adox took over all the Fotokemika equipment when they shut down. .. and equipment overhaul/replacement was the primary reason that ended EFKE. ( which originally Adox before WW2 ) .. However, as the equipment was nearing it's end of reliable service, digital photography stole the cash flow. They didn't see repairs being feasible.
@David Hancock Turning the clock back a bit, the original Adox company was one of the first in Europe. At the end of the war, the US was grabbing patents from Germany as war reparations. Adox, with its chemical formulae, everything was just given to Du Pont who had a graphic materials division but weren't interested in diversifying into photography. So they offered everything to Fotokemika in Zagreb on a lease basis. Under the name EFKE .. the sound of the letters f and k .. ef ke The Adox products were back in production. EFKE was never a big player in the US market, and very few were aware of its history. However, when Fotokemika decided to close down, the enterprising guy at FOTOIMPEX in Berlin, offered to take over the products, producing them at a new plant in Germany. Then, the ownership of the trade name ADOX became available and Fotoimpex snapped it up. I am confused as to who actually makes what, but it was an emotional 'Hooray!' when at least some of the original Adox (EFKE) products were back in their original label. If I had a bunch of money to put into a business, without any demands on returns, I'd put into their plant and equipment and also bring back 220 rollfilm.
David thank you for your review . I have learned a lot from it . But I don't like the combination of medium and (very} high contrast in many photo's in this video . The tonal scale looks more like a uneven staircase . I used a few Rollei RPX 25 films . This a practical very sharp film with a smooth tonal scale in Rodinal 1+100 at 13 minutes rated 25 ISO . Best regards Peter .
CMS 20 II reacts wildly differently, and generally not well, to developers other than Adotech. I would only use it in something other than Adotech if I had no choice. I do also like RPX 25 and really can't wait to start shooting it again for this series (next year I'm picking it back up.)
Not sure, as I've never used it. In general, high-contrast developers will not suit this film (in terms of what I'm looking for in images.) So if TD-3 is either high- or low-contrast, that may help answer that question.
@@DavidHancock Yeah, TD-3 is developed specifically for the purpose of controlling contrast in high contrast films. It was developed by Troop I think, and was supposed to be an improvement on technidol for use with tech pan or other similar technical films. It’s a LOT cheaper than the Adox developer though. It’s discussed in the Troop and Anchell book.
If you're in the U.S. Adox products have been hard to come buy the last year due to struggles with international trade and shipping. It sells out at Freestyle about as quickly as it arrives.
@@terrywbreedlove Oh it definitely will. All black and white films will work with all filters and differently so based on their spectral sensitivity. This film will not likely respond well to filters that increase contrast -- namely warm-tone filters. I would also think that, in general, filters with this film will make it harder to use because of how high contrast it is as a baseline.
@@DavidHancock Today i tried a red and polarizer filter together for the first time. Shooting 35mm Tmax 100 on the beach. I will develop it in the morning and I am excited to see what happens. I haven’t shot 35mm in a long time. I was using my Nikon F3 with a 17mm Tokina lens. I shoot 4x5 and medium format 99.9% of time time. But today was mostly about taking a long walk in the rain. I have to admit it was nice to have that built in light meter and let the camera do all the calculations 🤣
Oooohhh.... I've been looking at CMS-20 for years and been very tempted, but never pulled the trigger. On my next film purchase, I think I'm going to pick up a few rolls. Thanks for the detailed info and experiments.
Great video David with lots of very useful development data in terms of dilutions and times, but nowhere do you mention development temperature! 20C, 24C or something else?
Oh shoot. Good point. So I just keep my chemistry at room temp, which in the darkroom space is pretty consistently 22C year-round because it has no exterior walls.
In general, I'm a hard pass on red filters for film slower than 100 ISO solely due to the baseline contrast the film has and the increased contrast red filters provide.
Adotech IV is a very diluted developer already, that is why it acts like a supercompensating (as caffenol CL, eg), so when you developed your film with a dilution of 1:70 I am sure that you surpassed the developer capacity and that is why you got unpredictable output. CMS 20 is a great film, I would shoot it 24/7. In fact, is one of the three emulsions that I use.
David-thanks very much for this video. I’ve been very interested in this film but typically shoot 120. Are you, by chance, aware of an estimated time by which Adox will be back up and running for 120? Or is this more like-nobody makes 120 machines anymore so no estimate. Thanks!
I suspect you're seeing surge marks. I don't recall bromide drag on the photos but some of them did have surge marks from agitations that were too rough.
@@DavidHancock Thanks, I guess when it comes from the sprocket holes it’s bromide drag. I personally am very keen on getting clean film images and prints. Although minor artefacts are inevitable I am not a fan of dust, scratches and uneven development.
I wonder if a drum scanner could get the maximum resolution out of Adox CMS 20 II, seems like the only option. They top out at a whopping 11.000 dpi for a 35mm scan (from some services I've seen online) , so it makes sense, but regardless the camera lenses wouldn't resolve that resolution.
Not sure. I had wondered that. But I think this resolves so well that ultimately I doubt it. 11,000 dpi works out to about 433lp/mm, nothing that's not a perfect equivalent. I suspect that would still do better than most DSLR cameras and definitely better than flatbeds. The big question for me with scanners is always tonal depth, editability, and color.
@@DavidHancock Wow, just insane how much it takes to even get close to the potential resolution. Scanning 35mm at 11000 dpi would be about 15.587×10.384, around 161 megapixels ! They claimed 500mp, so theoretically their is still more detail, but this tops even the latest Hasselblads with 100-150mp sensors !
Nah, the great majority of CMS content that I see in internet is digitalised, which in my opinion is an error. Optic printing is the only way that yield good results. Also it is a bitch to scan, the density range of the film outperforms the vast majority of digital sensors and scanners. Clear base, bois, that Dmin is quite shady! (pun intended)
@@LaViejaConsolada I agree 100%. The major advantage would be for optical printing, which is rarely done nowadays, even through scans most people don't bother (I'm doing my printing from scans because it's cheaper (low res) and I don't develop/scan my own film). A nice enlarger lens, stopped down to f/8-f/11, and a sharp camera lens/tripod combination should be enough for making 16×20" prints from 35mm negatives of CMS 20 II. One day my dream would be to build my own darkroom, but unfortunately I don't have space/time/ nor do I shoot enough film (35mm) to justify that.
@@LaViejaConsolada But I think the point is missed with 35mm, as you're going to slow down the process anyways, might as well shoot 645/6×6. Not that 35mm is only good for fast action, but it's certainly limited , having to carefully shoot CMS 20 II, develop it, and use very slow ISO speed (12-20). The weight isn't as much of an issue (at least 645, 6×7 is just unbearable for most people), and you'll enjoy great results from faster films (Tmax 100, Acros 100 and Delta 100 come to mind).
Generally concur. LPMM is just one data point and it's highly fallible. Lens image characteristics, things like color transmission, distortion, and ghost and flare reduction are way more important than sharpness. Very many subjects don't benefit from grain-level sharpness, too.
2 gigapixel equivalent? I paused the video to get over the shock! I do not have the skill to shoot this film. The lowest iso I will go is pan f 50 by Ilford or 100 iso on colour film.
Noting that's a false equivalency, yes, but the goal there was only to express it's capabilities in more common terms to help cover how much detail this can capture. Film with equivalent resolution will outperform digital art the same resolution, too,
I look forward to these more than anything on TH-cam
Thank you!
I wondered why the ADOX films weren't available in the 120 format. They would indeed be fantastic! I hope they can get their 120 machines running again. I've also come to like ADOX films, although I haven't shot much of them (mostly their newer HR-50 stuff).
CMS 20 II is one of the cheaper ADOX films here in Germany, by the way, though Adotech is still very expensive.
Great video, David! Looking forward to this series every time there is a new one.
You are going to love the next few months. 😃 I have some Kickstarter stuff to do today but will be developing a bunch of Delta 100, Delta 3200, and TMax 100 today.
Another ace review on a film I have just started shooting. Thank you so much for this in depth video on Adox CMS 20 II! 👌🏻
Thank you!
Thank you very much. Will compare it to the 3 different Spur films. One of them as the same emulsion. As you said, the 120 options are a plus.
Thank you! Spur was not a film that had been on my radar at all. I'm excited to look into them now.
These videos make my day. I'd love an "about developer" series.
I will do that. I have an outline for that in the works. They won't be as in-depth, but will, I think, help shows how different developers work.
I remember you talking about this review. And it’s here!! Awesome. I love this film.
Thank you!
I really appreciate this insightful video, thank you.
Thank you!
This looks amazing, reminds me of Kodak Technical Pan! I can't wait to try it out.
It's a pretty incredible film, just a bit hard to use very well.
I believe Adox is working on getting 120 in production again... at least they've said they are for 100 CHS II... so I suspect this will come back in 120 as well. Great review. I'll try this in 4x5 at some point. But I think my technique needs some further practice to make it a worthwhile investment.
I really hope that happens. I would love to have CHS 100 in medium format when I get to that review (not soon.)
It's so good that CMS20 is much less expensive here in Germany - because it's my favorite BW film for landscapes and a joy to scan and also print in the darkroom. Never tried 120 or 4x5 though ;) I tend to rate it at ISO12 with standard development given by the Adotech bottle and are quite happy with the most results. In very sunny or contrasty situations, I go down to ISO 8 without altering the development and the highlights are mostly retained and recoverable. The only thing I really don't like about CMS20 is it's enormous curliness ...
Thank you! For the curl, I was able to reduce that a bit by letting it hand with some fishing weights on the end of the roll for a few days and then storing it in a negative book with weight (other negative books) on top of it.
@@DavidHancock After keeping the strips in the folders for some weeks, the curl disappear ... but beware of forgetting them loose in the darkroom -> The Curl Rises Again
Always wondered how that film would look like. And how bad it would be not using Adox own chemistry. Thanks for filling in all those white spots in the map. Lots of work on your behalf.
Thank you!
So happy to see "about film" series back. Thanks David a lot for Your dedication and effort to put this valuable experience/information online.
Thank you, Mantas!
I don’t know maybe it’s TH-cam but I like shadow detail in my images most of the time even if it is super sharp if there’s hardly any shadow details and a lot of the highlights seem blown out pretty badly in some of those images it doesn’t seem worth it to me. I’ll stick with Fuji Acros 100. Great information by the way about the film in your developer series.
Thank you!
I loved that sidenote, "Microfilm was read throug a fancy enlarger, that smelled like soup and (and) 1970s armpits.
:D
I can second that sentiment, had to use a microfiche machine in a Ford dealers parts dept years ago.
Good one, David. 👌
Thank you. Yeah, it's a bummer about the 120.
I learned a great deal ( as usual ). Your programs are absolutely top quality. Thank you. RS. Canada
Thank you, Richard!
I would love to see some examples of portraits with Adox 20CMS II. Thanks for all the advice and examples.
I concur and that's an acknowledged weakness in my reviews that I want to start rectifying this year.
Fascinating video on this film, well worth watching for your advice on processing it.
Thank you!
So glad to find this video. I’ve been saying for the longest time that I’d like to see someone experiment using this film with other developers
Thank you!
Nice vid, you should do the same type but for b&w developers. That will complement this series of videos nicely !
I concur. I have an idea of how to do that and just need some time to make it happen. It's on the to-do list for next year.
Very impressive work.
From its description it rem8nds me of Kodaks Tech Pan, which, after learning curve and exact developer, also produced 14x11 prints without grain.
Thank you for your hard work
Thank you!
When I heard you say Adotech was expensive I cringed. Then I heard the prices you quoted and I thought I’d buy it by the case lot without blinking😝
Seriously, come live in SA for a while where we pay ZAR17 for U$1 and ZAR18 for €1…😉
Very much looking forward to playing with this stuff soon…
Did you experiment with any filters for landscapes…red or yellow?
Cheers!
I only tried filters a couple of times and anything that increases contrast renders this almost a two-tone film.
An excellent video; I just wonder if you haven't so discouraged many from trying it that availability becomes an issue. For example, I understand there are labs that will use the ADOX chemicals, at least that was definitely true for Silvermax. I wrote to FOTOIMPEX toask if they knew of any near where I am located.
Thank you! I would say, for this film, it's one that really benefits from home developing because labs work in fast, strong chemistry (in general.) This is a film best used by advanced users with a good handle on their ability to develop this stock with good developing technique. I have a GREAT lab and I would definitely NOT send them this because they do all B&W in a 6-minute XTOL stock (or maybe 1+1) dip. This would not work well in that setting.
Why not simply agitate the 1:75? If your reason for stand developing is purely financial, not compensation, then there's no actual reason to need to leave it sitting still, you can agitate as much as you want and thus still save money but avoid all the bromide drag and whatnot. Just toss a film leader in there to rough out the time first with agitation. Also B&H sells Rollei Copex Rapid, which as far as I can tell is the same film as this, in 120.
Good question and it's a matter of the desired results. Agitation of any quantity in developing will increase negative contrast by replacing used chemistry with fresh. Stand developing will result in flatter negatives with better highlight and shadow detail. I do agree that bromide drag is a significant issue with stand developing and some chemistries and, when that's a concern, semi-stand is a good workaround.
his film is waste of money ! first of all, it's expensive for a black and white film, it's recommended to develop only in adotech 4 for best results, after drying , it curls, even if you keep it under heavy books, it's a pain working in darkroom with this film, and it's scratches easily ,it's not as sharp as they say. I made a side by side comparison, with an expired kodadk tmax100, ilford fp4, and astrum 64(for those who don't know what film is astrum 64, it's the former svema 64 )and the only difference that I noticed that the adox is slightly sharper, almost unnoticeable , it doesn't justifies the price, as for contrast and tones, astrum 64 is better, plus the spectral sensitivity of astrum FN-64 is expanded into the near infrared range of the energy spectrum, and it dries perfectly flat, and its more resistant to scratches and 3 times cheaper than adox, it can be developed with any developer. Here in Canada is $6.50 per roll.
Thank you!
Thanks for a very informative video. I just bought a few rolls of this and a bottle of the developer. Eager to try them and see how it works.
Nice! It's a great film if it can be tamed a bit.
A comparison between adox CMS 20 and Rollei rpx 25 would be really interesting
I agree. To me, the biggest difference is that RPX 25 has a much greater dynamic range that can be obtained more easily. I've used some RPX 25, but I wouldn't say I'm an expert in it yet.
The statement at 3:15 that 20C is equivalent to 72F is incorrect. 20C is the same as 68F.
Dang it. Thank you. I thought I had fixed that on the template.
Thank you for covering my favorit film!
Thank you! :D
Did you also try the spur developer? (Spur Nanotech UR)
Nope. I only used the ones listed in the video.
Adox took over all the Fotokemika equipment when they shut down. .. and equipment overhaul/replacement was the primary reason that ended EFKE. ( which originally Adox before WW2 ) .. However, as the equipment was nearing it's end of reliable service, digital photography stole the cash flow. They didn't see repairs being feasible.
Thank you! So the ongoing maintenance costs were the thing that did EFKE in?
@David Hancock Turning the clock back a bit, the original Adox company was one of the first in Europe. At the end of the war, the US was grabbing patents from Germany as war reparations. Adox, with its chemical formulae, everything was just given to Du Pont who had a graphic materials division but weren't interested in diversifying into photography. So they offered everything to Fotokemika in Zagreb on a lease basis. Under the name EFKE .. the sound of the letters f and k .. ef ke
The Adox products were back in production. EFKE was never a big player in the US market, and very few were aware of its history. However, when Fotokemika decided to close down, the enterprising guy at FOTOIMPEX in Berlin, offered to take over the products, producing them at a new plant in Germany. Then, the ownership of the trade name ADOX became available and Fotoimpex snapped it up. I am confused as to who actually makes what, but it was an emotional 'Hooray!' when at least some of the original Adox (EFKE) products were back in their original label. If I had a bunch of money to put into a business, without any demands on returns, I'd put into their plant and equipment and also bring back 220 rollfilm.
David thank you for your review . I have learned a lot from it . But I don't like the combination of medium and (very} high contrast in many photo's in this video . The tonal scale looks more like a uneven staircase . I used a few Rollei RPX 25 films . This a practical very sharp film with a smooth tonal scale in Rodinal 1+100 at 13 minutes rated 25 ISO . Best regards Peter .
CMS 20 II reacts wildly differently, and generally not well, to developers other than Adotech. I would only use it in something other than Adotech if I had no choice. I do also like RPX 25 and really can't wait to start shooting it again for this series (next year I'm picking it back up.)
I've been thinking of trying photographer's formulary td-3 with this. Wondering if that might work well and tame some of the contrast.
Not sure, as I've never used it. In general, high-contrast developers will not suit this film (in terms of what I'm looking for in images.) So if TD-3 is either high- or low-contrast, that may help answer that question.
@@DavidHancock Yeah, TD-3 is developed specifically for the purpose of controlling contrast in high contrast films. It was developed by Troop I think, and was supposed to be an improvement on technidol for use with tech pan or other similar technical films. It’s a LOT cheaper than the Adox developer though. It’s discussed in the Troop and Anchell book.
Is it me or are almost all of your images overdeveloped?
Some are with some developers, others were underdeveloped. On my monitor, the majority appear properly developed.
David, where do you buy Adox CMS 20 4x5 in USA? I cannot find it, it looks like out of stock everywhere. I love this channel btw. Thank you 🙏
I order the vast majority of my film from Freestyle. They are likely out of stock, too. Back to school drains a lot of film suppliers stocks.
I can't find the film or developer in stock right now.. As soon as it is I will buy both and give it a shot.
If you're in the U.S. Adox products have been hard to come buy the last year due to struggles with international trade and shipping. It sells out at Freestyle about as quickly as it arrives.
@@DavidHancock Yep in the US. I have BH notifying me when they have it in stock. Does this film work with colored filters like Tmax and the others ?
@@terrywbreedlove Oh it definitely will. All black and white films will work with all filters and differently so based on their spectral sensitivity. This film will not likely respond well to filters that increase contrast -- namely warm-tone filters. I would also think that, in general, filters with this film will make it harder to use because of how high contrast it is as a baseline.
@@DavidHancock Today i tried a red and polarizer filter together for the first time. Shooting 35mm Tmax 100 on the beach. I will develop it in the morning and I am excited to see what happens. I haven’t shot 35mm in a long time. I was using my Nikon F3 with a 17mm Tokina lens. I shoot 4x5 and medium format 99.9% of time time. But today was mostly about taking a long walk in the rain. I have to admit it was nice to have that built in light meter and let the camera do all the calculations 🤣
Any thoughts on ADOX CMS 100 II film stock? I’m shooting CMS 20 now. Had a bad box of 25 that developed blank yet will buy it again. Thanks
I tried it some years ago and liked it. I haven't dug back into it yet. As a general statement I think Adox films are exceptional.
Great review, have you tried scala reversal kit on CMS 20 II?
I have not. There's no one doing Scala reversals in the U.S. any more, that I know of. DR5 has stopped and I think they were the last.
@@DavidHancock I purchased the scala reversal kit, I read that it works with CMS 20II. I’ll have to give it a try.
What an amazing presentation!
Thank you!
Oooohhh.... I've been looking at CMS-20 for years and been very tempted, but never pulled the trigger. On my next film purchase, I think I'm going to pick up a few rolls. Thanks for the detailed info and experiments.
Nice! It's an awesome film.
Great video David with lots of very useful development data in terms of dilutions and times, but nowhere do you mention development temperature! 20C, 24C or something else?
Oh shoot. Good point. So I just keep my chemistry at room temp, which in the darkroom space is pretty consistently 22C year-round because it has no exterior walls.
where can i buy this film
Fotoimpex seems it or if you're in the US Freestyle
cool music , what ?
Might be listed in the description
What are your thoughts about using a Red 25 filter with this film?
In general, I'm a hard pass on red filters for film slower than 100 ISO solely due to the baseline contrast the film has and the increased contrast red filters provide.
Adotech IV is a very diluted developer already, that is why it acts like a supercompensating (as caffenol CL, eg), so when you developed your film with a dilution of 1:70 I am sure that you surpassed the developer capacity and that is why you got unpredictable output.
CMS 20 is a great film, I would shoot it 24/7. In fact, is one of the three emulsions that I use.
Thank you! I didn't know that about Adotech IV. I do love CMS 20 II in Adotech at 1+14. It's a great pairing and this is a superb film.
@@DavidHancock Adotech IV I could not find anywhere
Amazing video, lots of relevant information. Grateful for sharing!
Thank you!
Great work!
Thank you!
I'm trying to figure out a dilution and time with 510 Pyro but if I can't figure it out, I'll go back to POTA
That's not one that I can help with, unfortunately.
David-thanks very much for this video. I’ve been very interested in this film but typically shoot 120. Are you, by chance, aware of an estimated time by which Adox will be back up and running for 120? Or is this more like-nobody makes 120 machines anymore so no estimate. Thanks!
Nope. It broke something like five years ago. I understand that the broken part is very expensive.
@@DavidHancock Oh, man! That doesn't sound good and this is so unfortunate! Thanks for the info!
I'd try it with a 35mm adapter kit in a Pentax 6x7. At least one dimension would be MF.
That could be an interesting look, too.
Did you try it with yellow or orange filter?
I think I mentioned that somewhere in here, but I don't recall. I think I did and found any warm filter added too much contrast.
Some negs show bromide drag, that’s due to stand development, right?
I suspect you're seeing surge marks. I don't recall bromide drag on the photos but some of them did have surge marks from agitations that were too rough.
@@DavidHancock Thanks, I guess when it comes from the sprocket holes it’s bromide drag. I personally am very keen on getting clean film images and prints. Although minor artefacts are inevitable I am not a fan of dust, scratches and uneven development.
Ooh I've been waiting for this one!
I hope it's worth the wait. :D
Excellent job, as always!
Thank you, Matteo!
Absolutely fantastic
Thank you!
I wonder if a drum scanner could get the maximum resolution out of Adox CMS 20 II, seems like the only option.
They top out at a whopping 11.000 dpi for a 35mm scan (from some services I've seen online) , so it makes sense, but regardless the camera lenses wouldn't resolve that resolution.
Not sure. I had wondered that. But I think this resolves so well that ultimately I doubt it. 11,000 dpi works out to about 433lp/mm, nothing that's not a perfect equivalent. I suspect that would still do better than most DSLR cameras and definitely better than flatbeds. The big question for me with scanners is always tonal depth, editability, and color.
@@DavidHancock
Wow, just insane how much it takes to even get close to the potential resolution.
Scanning 35mm at 11000 dpi would be about 15.587×10.384, around 161 megapixels !
They claimed 500mp, so theoretically their is still more detail, but this tops even the latest Hasselblads with 100-150mp sensors !
Nah, the great majority of CMS content that I see in internet is digitalised, which in my opinion is an error. Optic printing is the only way that yield good results. Also it is a bitch to scan, the density range of the film outperforms the vast majority of digital sensors and scanners. Clear base, bois, that Dmin is quite shady! (pun intended)
@@LaViejaConsolada
I agree 100%.
The major advantage would be for optical printing, which is rarely done nowadays, even through scans most people don't bother (I'm doing my printing from scans because it's cheaper (low res) and I don't develop/scan my own film).
A nice enlarger lens, stopped down to f/8-f/11, and a sharp camera lens/tripod combination should be enough for making 16×20" prints from 35mm negatives of CMS 20 II.
One day my dream would be to build my own darkroom, but unfortunately I don't have space/time/ nor do I shoot enough film (35mm) to justify that.
@@LaViejaConsolada
But I think the point is missed with 35mm, as you're going to slow down the process anyways, might as well shoot 645/6×6.
Not that 35mm is only good for fast action, but it's certainly limited , having to carefully shoot CMS 20 II, develop it, and use very slow ISO speed (12-20).
The weight isn't as much of an issue (at least 645, 6×7 is just unbearable for most people), and you'll enjoy great results from faster films (Tmax 100, Acros 100 and Delta 100 come to mind).
Lines / mm doesn't tell you shit about the lens. It might be very high, but the inter tonal values might suck, i. e. the lens produces poor gradation.
Generally concur. LPMM is just one data point and it's highly fallible. Lens image characteristics, things like color transmission, distortion, and ghost and flare reduction are way more important than sharpness. Very many subjects don't benefit from grain-level sharpness, too.
@@DavidHancock right on
2 gigapixel equivalent? I paused the video to get over the shock! I do not have the skill to shoot this film. The lowest iso I will go is pan f 50 by Ilford or 100 iso on colour film.
Noting that's a false equivalency, yes, but the goal there was only to express it's capabilities in more common terms to help cover how much detail this can capture. Film with equivalent resolution will outperform digital art the same resolution, too,
Soup and armpits 😂
:D