- This topic is empty.
Which film and why ?
-
hugh wrote:
I use Ilford FP4. Why? Because that’s the 100 speed b&w film in 4×5 size that they always have sitting in the fridge in Gunns.
They now have Foma 4×5 in the fridge also Hugh. Can’t remember the price though.
Tri-x is a very cool film for an edgy look, but one has to agree of course with previous comments, it does come down to how you treat it.
I like used to like TRI-X a lot and developed it in HC-110 mostly. Tri-X 400 used to be my street shooting film, APX100 and perhaps occasionally Technical Pan my “fine art” stuff. When I stopped using 35mm film about 5 years ago, and started to work more with 120, 4×5 and 5×7 film, I ended up just using FP4+ 90% of the time; occasionally, I use the SFX200 in 120.
I recently got back into doing some 35mm b/w: I now use 3 films:
Rollei Retro100 (more or less = the old APX100) or FP4+ in common developers (e.g. Ilfosol 3, ID-11, HC-110, Caffenol-C) and Adox CMS20 in its proprietary Adotech developer. This latter 20 ASA/ISO film suits me just fine, as I love using my 35mm rangefinder at f2.I think it all comes down to personal taste and shooting style. Sometimes less is more and cutting down on variables like film emulsions can help hone a certain look you’re after.
Same with everything really. I may have a myriad of lenses and cameras, but use only two each 95% of the time, (so I think a sell-off is on the cards for me as well)I use Acros 100 for landscape and tripod work, great for long exposures, Neopan 400 for the Holga has always been the favourite, both developed in ID 11 or Rodinal. I have been trying to find a good film to use at 200asa for street portraits and tried reducing Neopan 400 but did not like it. Going to try the Tri x over the weekend if its still available.
Surprising pulling Neopan didn’t work out too well, with many films usually benefitting from the extra shadow depth from the extra stop of exposure.
Curious as to what you didn’t like in the film 200, as I’m on the lookout for a nice 400 iso film in 120, which can be withstand a bit of pushing and pulling in development.
I believe Acros can be quite a flexible film, but this is based on some of the results I’ve seen when its been processed in Caffenol, which when used with a slightly modified Caffenol recipe seemed to give a useable iso of 100- 1600. An audacious claim to be sure, but it certainly picqued my interest. http://caffenol.blogspot.com/2010/03/r.html” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false;
Damien, I was quite surprised with the results initially , I only had 400asa at the time and the lighting was bright and contrasty, I wanted to use a small f-stop so reduced the film speed. Maybe I should have reduced development also to allow for the contrasty light, this might have given me a less contrasty neg. Acros is a really fine film, No 1 for landscapes and still life in my book I rate it at 50asa developed in Rodinal 1+50.
Was in Gunns today …
Ilford FP4 – 25 sheets of 4×5 is 28.50
Fomapan 100 – 50 sheets of 4×5 is 22.00Decided to give the Fomapan a try …
hugh wrote:
Was in Gunns today …
Ilford FP4 – 25 sheets of 4×5 is 28.50
Fomapan 100 – 50 sheets of 4×5 is 22.00Decided to give the Fomapan a try …
For some reason the Ilford films seem to have become more expensive again lately. I really like using HP5+ and FP4+ but noticed the Ilford prices on 7dayshop have increased quite a bit and now Neopan and Kodak films are cheaper. A year ago I think it was almost the other way around.
I bought 50 rolls of Fuji Acros 100, and 50 rolls of Velvia 100, to use in a recently acquired Mamiya RB67, because they were cheap (from 7dayshop). Ashamed by th fact I still have 50 rolls of each :oops:
Also bought a pack of FP-100c Polaroid film and took a test shot with one of these. Very impressed with the colour and clarity, probably because the only Polaroid’s I’ve ever seen before were taken with a cheapo Polaroid instant camera with a crappy lens.
As an aside, has anyone taken a Polaroid, and tried to scan the negative you’re instructed to throw away?
Here’s the result of trying this, the test shot I took of the mutt lying on the ground.
Strange result, I know, but might be interesting if the image was a landscape or cityscape?Rog
Looks good Rog I’d try a bit more of that, looks like the Polaroid 55 of old.
at night I use tmax100,acros,develope in diafine or rodinol also provia 100,t64,or 160 neg plus delta3200 handneld,
daytime I’ll use portra 400 vc/nc,tmax400 and velvia50 for landscapeswhatever there is in the shop
so mainly t max 100 an 400 at the moment. but have a roll of delta in camera now. I did shoot a roll of fomapan 100 recently and really got the developement wrong (although I did not think 10% extra time would overdevelope it so much), the negs are so dense i have not even tried to print any yet,I only recently started d + p my own stuff again after 5 or 6 years, and looking at the negs I cant help but feel the ones from years ago are ‘better’ possibly because im using a different developer now, or have films changed?
redto wrote:
or have films changed?
This would seem to be the case, with most published experts in common agreement that emulsions are often modified, without any public acknowledgment of such by any of the manufacturers. For example many b&w films contain more dyes than they would have previously, if sources are to be believed, and it is not uncommon for films to react completely differently to the same developers when book authors re-test films in anticipation of the publication of a new edition of their book.
By far my main film is APX 100 but I have a varied fridge.
Current stocks are:c. 1000 rolls of APX 100 (including bulk rolls)
43 rolls APX 25
50 Rolls TriX 35mm
10 Rolls Tmax100
10 Rolls TMax400
5 Rolls Tmax 3200
About 10 rolls of XP2 and BW400CN never seem to use em.
10 Rolls Rollei Pan 25
10 Rolls Neopan 400
and some other B&W stragglers.
25 rolls Portra 160NC
50 Rolls Reala
50 Rolls NPZ
50 Rolls NPS
c. 150 rolls Kodak Gold (God knows when Ill use em!)and about 25 rolls of HP5 in 120, 5 rolls Porta 800 120 and last but not least 10 rolls Reala 120.
As to why:
APX 100 is so versatile, I often shoot it at 320 as well as at 160. Its just a beautiful film to work with.
APX 25 is the god film =)
TriX is gritty when I want gritty and pushes well in the dark.
The other B&W is generally from testing and when I want a certain look.The color is mostly for portraits, I go through the color very slowly.
I may have a film addiction problem =)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
