ISO 12800 or higher

anyone here who has felt that the 3200 stock pushed to 6400 was still

not enough??

 

i don't know of any higher iso films out there, and i know that

pushing will only really give you more highlights without really

affecting the shadows, and you also can't get something from

nothing...meaning, no light, no image...no matter the film

speed/shutter speed.

 

any examples or experiences from you fellow forum members at iso's

above 6400 would be greatly appreciated...maybe some shots in a really

dingy bar where your light meter refused to give you anything.

 

-m

First off, the 3200 films are really ISO 800 to 1200 films that are being pushed to 3200 with Kodak's and Ilford's blessing. They give much better results at lower speeds. 6400 is really stretching the limit. That's why they make so called "night vision" equipment, so called starlight scopes, that electronicly gives you an image in next to no light. They can be adapted to use on a camera. They're used by police and the military, and you can also buy them from marine electronics dealers.

 

You might want to check the B&W Film and Film and Processing forums here on photo.net as this has been discussed before.

Do a google search on that.

 

A few years ago, I remembe reading a piece on the web about pushing to very high IE's (like 25,000 or more) with decent shadow rendering.

 

The soups were oddball and the procedures were sorta interesting too.

 

I think one was like... souping at very low temps, another had some homebrew formulas, another had some dual and TRIPLE souping to get the film where it was wanted.

 

I find the Ilford Delta3200 at 1600 just fine for all but the blackest cats in the dimmest coalbins.

matt--Kodak's developing chart that comes with Tmax 3200 shows times for

12,500. They're usually pretty conservative about such things so I would

suspect they consider it reasonable.

 

As an aside I tested the pre-production emulsion back in the 1980's. We shot

some at 12,500 and at 25,000. It seemed a bit of a stretch but the Tmax

developer worked pretty well.

 

Over the years I have shot hundreds of rolls of the Tmax3200. I've always

been happy shooting at 1600 asa and developing at 3200asa in Tmax

developer. Shadow detail is good with out blowing the highlights.

TMZ@12800. Xtol 1+1<div></div>

Skully- It helps that everything in your picture is white! Nice though.

Hang on, I'm working on it.

Same deal. TMZ@12800. Xtol 1+1.<div></div>

Nice photos Skully! TMZ@EI3200 always produces very visible grain in my photos. Your photos show very little grain, relatively speaking. It must be the XTOL! I used Ilford Delta 3200@EI3200 for a while because it is far less grainy than TMZ. But there's something magical and beautiful about a very grainy B&W photograph! And both TriX and TMZ have very nice grain patterns.

ISO/ASA is defined with a strict definition; which requires the film curve to be developed so the slope of the speed point to a higher exposed area; is a certain slope. Certain developers may make a iso 1000/1200 film; like the "3200" products higher; but really not too much. The title of theis thread should be "Response to <b>EI 12800 or higher</b>; because "3200" products with wild wazoo developers dont reach even 2000 asa/iso. The shadow detail area; the toe gets very little boost; with over development. I'm not trying to be a prty pooper here; just trying to define the proper terms; likt Kodak; and SPIE has used for 1/2 a century. <BR><BR>I have shot a bulk roll pf 2475 recording film long ago; and used wazoo developers; preflashing; and once a 1 hour development time! The decently exposed areas due yield darker negatives; but the deep shadow area (toe) is real stubborn SOB; and barely budges with overdevelopment.

Here's a crop. I thought that I had shot some at 25000, but I can't find any negs. I'm bored though, so I'll get right on it. Give me a day or three to shoot and process it, and I'll get back to you.<div></div>

thanks skully these are great! any special processing notes with the xtol?

 

-m

I forget the photographer's name, but Issue 15 of Black & White Magazine (for fine art collectors) had a set of photos done at 12800 from both kodak's and ilford's 3200 films.....not a dingy bar, but Japanese Steam rooms....

Mousy's stuff is great.

Matt: As Kelly points out, there is no way to get shadow detail at EI 12500 - unless, of course, you meter and expose for the shadows themselves, in which case you're just dropping the effective EI back down 3 stops or so to 1600.

 

The trick is to take photos (as Skully did) in which the significant parts of the picture are the highlights, and then let the shadows go inky (as they will). Make sure your subject's face (e.g.) is turned towards the light, or silhouetted against a light area, or otherwise composed so that you don't NEED any shadow detail for an effective picture.

 

My main experience shooting really high ISOs was in small-town high school basketball courts. Fortunately when the players leapt towards the basket they were facing into the overhead lights, so their faces (and the ball) were lit well enough to record on film. The faces, ball, part of the white jerseys, and the lights themselves were the only things that showed up on film. And, and that, they were usually just rim-lit. But, effectively composed, they were enough to tell the story.