>>4017141>Arista/Fomapan 400 are cubic grain films.Yeah they are.
>but it seems to want more light than I'd expect.Also true. Some manufacturers are a bit optimistic with their ISO ratings. Which means you won't get that ISO unless you're using a speed-enhancing developer. Fomapan 400 is one of those. You should try their ISO200 film though, its speed is bang on and it's a "hybrid" emulsion (kinda like t-grain mixed with cubic grain), so you get actually low grain, less than TMax 400 (and *much* less than Fomapan 400, maybe slughtly less than Fomapan 100 and FP4+ even). The price is good too.
And yeah what you say makes sense.
Start slow and take it from there.
Rodinal might be not optimal, but it won't actually ruin any photo. It can perform fine if you know its characteristics (i.e. it loses speed so give more exposure, it gives big grain on ISO400 cubin grain films, etc.), and work around them.
>What's the shelf stability of Diafine like?Infinite pretty much. I mean definitely years, haven't had any go bad on me before I exhausted it.
>And is there any reason you prefer Delta 3200 versus... I forget the name now, but whatever the Kodak film is that's meant for pushing?TMax P3200.
Well Delta is a bit faster, almost half a stop. That means slightly better detail in the shadows, so if I'm going fast, might as well go all the way. P3200 has slightly smaller grain though. In practice, if you treat the films the same in terms of exposure and development, with Delta you'll get slightly higher shadow detail and slightly lower contrast (good for high contrast scenes), with P3200 you'll get slightly smaller grain.
My preference is not a strong one and all things being equal, I wouldn't hesitate to use them interchangeably. What seals the deal though is that Delta 3200 is quite a bit cheaper and more readily available in Europe.
