>>4017533""Tonality"", ""looks digital"".
Truth is, unless you have specific needs, t-grain films are fine. It's just that some people never learnt to use them or use appropriate developers for them.
>>4017266>I have heard that in the past there were thin based films and PET based films with 72 exposures per roll.Yup, there was some HP5 (not the plus version) with distinct packaging and gold coloured caps on the canister, called "HP5 Auto Winder". Short lived though, due to most consumers not having experience with PET based film at the time (i.e. lightpiping, or damaging the camera if you try to force it when jammed, vs triacetate film that would just rip), plus it needed a special tank and reel for dev cause it was twice as long.
>Theyre repurposed aeriel stock iirc. Agfa maybe?Most of their films (not the RPX line) are so (Retro 80S, HR50, 400S, IR 400).
Btw you reminded me of "Retropan" from Foma. It seems to be a new emulsion, or a reintroduced very old one, judging from the massive grain, reduced antihalation, and soft contrast.
