Jump to content

Characterful Film


Gerard

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So... I've just gone and purchased an MDa and a 15mm Super Heliar (+ finder). Having shot exclusively with digital media, it will be my first experience with film; and I could do with some pointers.

 

Can you recommend some characterful films? I'll shoot mostly B&W.

 

Would also be good to know what colour film works best in low light situations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

If you are getting your film scanned by a high end lab machine I'd say Tri-X, if you are scanning it yourself I'd say HP5. Why so? Tri-X curls badly making it difficult to achieve a flat surface with many current popular scanners. Additionally HP5 has a richer mid tone range and on average (depending on development) isn't as contrasty as Tri-X, which means it is closer to the DR sweet spot of home scanners.

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

FP4 for a slower film, Tri-X for a faster one, Fuji Neopan 1600 for faster still.

 

Never liked Delta 3200 @ 3200, it's much better pulled to 1600 IMHO.

 

Never had any problems scanning hundreds of rolls of Tri-X - though I was using a film scanner not a flatbed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my film scanner(s) I've had the most trouble with tri-x curling. This is the tri-x after they redid the film base around 10 years ago processed by pro las.

On the other hand my hand processed delta 400 doesn't have as much curl.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are getting your film scanned by a high end lab machine I'd say Tri-X, if you are scanning it yourself I'd say HP5. Why so? Tri-X curls badly making it difficult to achieve a flat surface with many current popular scanners. Additionally HP5 has a richer mid tone range and on average (depending on development) isn't as contrasty as Tri-X, which means it is closer to the DR sweet spot of home scanners.

 

Steve

 

Seconded! Have used HP5+ and Tri-X this year and Tri-X is a devil to position successfully in the holders on my V700. Even after a couple of days under a pile of weighty books it still has a tendency to curl. Mind you, now that I have 'Magnum Contact Sheets' and Erwin Puts's 'Leica Compendium', even Tri-X might cry enough when these mighty tomes are plonked on top. :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried a roll of Ilford XP2 400 last week and it sure gave a lot of character but it could be the camera (forty year old non-Leica) :rolleyes: The store developed and scanned it in one hour for €11 though. I've now loaded Tri-X 400 instead for tomorrow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mine is hand processed by me in soft/distilled water and dried over a radiator.

 

Not sure why there should be such a difference in experience.

 

Perhaps we are in danger of hijacking the original purpose of the thread, so I will just refer to a previous discussion on Tri-X and it's propensity to 'bow' ('curl' is ambiguous in this context). Aside from that aspect, I go along with others that Tri-X has character and it is my favourite for 'street'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

TMAX, both of them.

 

But as has been already said here: "My usual advice. Film is dirt cheap. Your taste is your taste. Buy a bundle of different rolls, shoot them and decide for yourself!".

 

And try them with two or three developers that give distinctly different results: XTol, Rodinal and Perceptol.

 

That should keep you busy during the upcoming holidays.

Link to post
Share on other sites

HP5@800 or 1600 in rodinal or hc-110 is unmistakable. Tri-x in Rodinal is unique, also.

But Delta3200 and Tmax3200 are simply oozing character, all the time.

 

I always look out to use D3200 or tmax3200, even in the sun. I don't mind shooting @f16. The character I get from those films easily wins over the over rated bokeh. And to get some bokeh, simply set the hyper focal from minimum focus up to 2 meters @f16 and there you have bokeh and character from the lens as well as from the film.

On every trip I go, i ways dedicate 20 rolls of D3200 or Tmax3200 to my xpan and shoot at f16-f22. Character is the best term to describe the results.

 

To answer your question, I personally don't make a big fuss over shooting at 1600 or 3200 as I always choose 3200. I want grain and character, not finesse and silky smoothnes, from my 3200 film. But what's interesting to note is that while tmax3200 can be hard, D3200 can be very smooth.

 

D3200 is my film of choice in my Hasselblads 501cm and SWC as well. When I'm out of it, I am delighted to shoot HP5@1600 and develop in hc-110:B

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave, you can use ND filters to knock down the light and shooting @ 1600 makes the Delta 3200 reasonably grainy. I don't mind grain, but on 3200 is a bit too harsh for me - it's all matter of taste I suppose and the 1 stop difference is no big deal...

Regards,

Boris

Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 for Neopan 1600 for really grainy look.

 

Velvia 50, pushed to 100 is my other staple film. And have just recently discovered Portra 160 which is really nice. Amazing colours and definition.

 

I don't like Ilford HP or FP. There's something with the grain I don't like at all. Tmax is nice for general b/w.

 

Just get a bunch and try them out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...