Higher speed B&W films or just push?

[rob_x2004]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I guess I am talking more lower light rather than subject speed requiring higher shutter speeds, which I see as two separate situations not always related.

What are your thoughts, particularly wrt digital workflow to print?

If you can manage the subject, stay with the slower iso to provide a more editable dynamic range and underxpose? Straight into 400, 800, 1600 films?

[EJohnE]

Look at "Any long term users of Tri-X here" thread, where I have attached both a jpeg, and later a PDF re pushing in differing light/contrast conditions.

 

(EJohnE) John.

[rob_x2004]

Thanks John, yes I have seen that. I've never really been a Trix/Rodinal/Leica lens/Aus light fan myself, though I havent run round with the stuff on dusk and after. I can understand the medium format attraction. Ive only shot a dozen or so 35mm Trix in rodinal and to be honest the last four rolls are still sitting on the kichen shelf because I havent made the effort to pick them up and bin them. How do you find Trix/Rodinal in the Qld environment? Presumably youre pretty experienced in the old and new? Ive gone out and bought an ND4, so I am looking at the 400s again.

[danmitch]

Hi - I use a lot of HP5+ and have always found I much prefer the results with this pushed a couple of stops over using Delta 3200 (at 1600) or Neopan 1600. I also find with careful developing, on 35mm, there is not a huge benefit to a "pushed" slower film such as FP4 over HP5+, whether scanning or printing.

 

In my experience, modern films (Delta / TMax) don't produce results to my liking when pushed.

 

My standard film is therefore HP5+ at anything from 200 to 1600 and only when I am convinced of really bright conditions will I step to a slower film, normally Pan F 50.

 

Best - Dan

[topoxforddoc]

I prefer uprated HP5 to Delta 3200 or Neopan 1600. I push HP5 regularly up to 3200 in XTOL. It gets a bit grainy, but perfectly acceptable, I think. Tonality is pretty good too, even when pushed. Here's a couple of HP5 shots, the first at 1600 and the other at 3200.

 

Charlie

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[tgray]

What speed of film are you using now? If using slower than 400 ISO, then I would definitely recommend going to the Tri-X, HP5+, or the new T-Max 400. If you like Rodinal, that's great, but I'd go with XTOL or the another speed enhancing developer.

 

If you need faster speeds, either push Tri-X (my choice) up to 800 or 1600 in XTOL, of maybe try Tri-X in Diafine. You can get a reasonably convincing 1250 out of Tri-X in Diafine. Pushing will cause you to lose shadow detail though, but you'll get finer grain than if you go to a super speed film. I donly have a couple of shots with Tri-X at 1600 in XTOL. They were usable, but I usually resorted to Diafine.

 

I personally prefer just to go to T-MAX P3200 TMZ when I need 1600. I don't mind the bit of extra grain and you get great shadow detail when its shot at 1600. 3200 starts to lose a bit in the shadows, but it's still very usable. Ilford 3200 is basically the same - some of us prefer TMZ, some Ilford, but its mostly personal choice. Note, neither of these are 3200 speed films, they are more like 1000ish. The Ilford is supposed to be a hair faster. But they were made for pushing, so 1600 looks great.

 

Neopan 1600 is slower than Kodak or Ilford 3200 speed films, which means it's slower than 1000. I've read its about 600. Personally I'd rather just shoot Tri-X. It is however finer grained than Kodak/Ilford 3200. Most shots I see of Neopan 1600 just look to contrasty and pushed to me.

 

Here's a couple example pics. Sorry for so many... hahaha.

 

Tri-X at 1250 in Diafine:

 

 

Tri-X at 1600 in Diafine - not much shadow detail, the shorts are black:

 

 

P3200TMZ at 1600 in XTOL:

 

 

P3200TMZ at 3200 in XTOL:

 

[tobey bilek]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Push is just a contrast increase to make the image easier to print.

 

The shadow detail with any given developer is fixed. Some developers get a bit more than others, but not a whole lot.

 

So if you want detail in the darks, get a faster lens or film or a tripod. If you just want an image like the samples shown, pushing is fine.

 

Digital is different. Shadow detail is maintained but a lot of noiose can be generated the higher you go. The latest NIkon D3, D700 and the better Canon models are superb at high ISO, but there is still a noise penalty.