Best BW film for portraiture?

[paul_sivley]

What's your most successful B&W film for portraiture on location or

in the studio and why? I'm talking strictly for shooting people.

What do you develop it with?

 

Thanks

Paul S

[jon_porter1]

35mm Tri-X, Tmax 100, FP4+ developed in HC-110 1:32. Why? Because that's the film I

use for everything else and am most comfortable with. I worry more about my lighting

than I do the film I'm using.

[Spearhead]

It really depends on how you want your portraits to look. Like the poster above, I pretty much use the same film (Tri-X in Rodinal) unless I get some amazing deal on something in the closeout bin. I don't use the closeout bin for my important work though.

<p>

Just pick something <i>you</i> like and see how it looks. If it works, stick with it. If it doesn't, try something else. Knowing that I prefer a contrasty and grainy look in my final prints really doesn't help you in the least.

[michaelging]

I too use Tri-x film almost all of the time.I am a sharpness nut for most of my photos,but some films and developer combinations have such amount of edge sharpness that I find that its unflattering in Portraits.I also use Plus-x at times and develope it in Microdol-x at a ,1 to 3 ratio.This gives fine ,smooth grain,with good skin tones, and a workable contrast range. As the posts above say,find one or two films and learn them inside out.

[jay_de_fehr]

I just finished some darkroom remodeling, and in the moving out/moving in process, I had the opportunity to go through my old negatives/proof sheets, and found good examples of many, many, film/developer combinations. Any time I read that someone gets good results with a particular film/developer combo, I'm not surprised, yet when I read that someone has disdained a film/developer combination on the grounds that it was incapable of good results, I'm always suspicious. Many times the unnacceptable results are written off as a matter of taste, but I suspect that there is more to it than that. In looking through my proof sheets, I find it very difficult/impossible to recognize film/developer combinations by sight, and the similarities are often uncanny. Pan F in Rodinal looks remarkably like Tri-X @ 200 in D-76 1:1, etc., etc. I'm not suggesting that there are not good reasons why some combinations are better suited to portraits than others, just that the differences are often overemphasized.

[frank.schifano]

Like everything else in photography (and just about everything else in life) the short answer is, it depends. It depends on your film format, your final print size, and the "look" you want at the end of the process. There is no hard and fast answer.

 

Tri-X in dilute XTOL has a wonderful grey scale. I prefer it over HP5+ mainly for that reason. The grain is not noticeable in a 4x enlargement, but get up to 10x and it starts to show, especially in areas of continous tone. If you want to get up to 10x enlargements with minimal grain, then you have to go for a slower film. I keep going back and forth between Plus-X and FP4+. Truth is that I like both of these films, but each has it's own little niche. FP4+ gets the nod for having a smoother gradation than Plus-X. Dilute XTOL is again my favorite developer for these films in 135, but Rodinal 1+50 works very well in larger formats, if you don't plan big enlargements. You will pay a speed penalty with Rodinal, so plan on rating either of these films a little lower than box speed to get good shadow detail. If you don't have any deep shadows with detail in the frame, as you would in a controlled lighting environment, then it's not so much of a problem. I've also had some very nice results making 8x to 10x prints from TMX in Rodinal 1+50, but once again you do need to count on some speed loss. All things considered though, dilute XTOL is a better developer for this film than Rodinal. There is no sharpness penalty, apparent grain is even finer (though that hardly matters much with this film), and you get full film speed. What's not to like?

 

I'm sure others will chime in here with other suggestions. Some like Agfa's films, others will prefer Fuji, and a few will suggest some eastern European films souped in some sort of pyrogallol developer. That's fine, but not for me. Fuji films are first rate. Neopan 400 is practically identical to Tri-X, but in my neck of the woods it is also more expensive so why bother? Agfa's APX 100 is supposed to have a unique look and is reported to be very nice when developed in Rodinal. I don't know, but I'll have to give it a try one day soon.

 

Whatever you decide, just be aware that care, patience, and careful observation will yield a much greater reward than any magic bullet film/developer combination.

[Glenn McCreery]

I prefer chromegenic films, such as Ilford XP2, for portraits since they tend to have lower contrast than conventional B&W and give very smooth skin tones. And processing is easy, just give it to your local mini-lab for 35mm or a camera store or lab that develops C41 for 120 film.

[Alan Johnson]

For studio portraits, a vote for TMX or Acros at box speed in Perceptol 1:3 or Microdol 1:3. 11x enlargements show smooth tonality. For headshots skin pores show little grain.

[rustys pics]

Lately I like Kodak Plus-X. Kodak really improved that stuff with a new coating plant. The

grain is much finer, as are the mid-tones. AGFA APX 100 in Ilford DD-X is a winner too.

Mid tones really glow.<div></div>

[fritz_ptasynski]

Paul,

 

Try Fuji ACROS. It is an orthopanchromatic film - which means it is

less sensitive to the reds than regular B&W films like Plus-X or

Tri-X. The grain structure is superlative - even with 35 mm. I would

rate it at ISO 50 and then you can use a split bath D-76 formula, or,

if you want to shoot a blonde in a white dress on a white seamless or

on the beach, use Pyrocat HDM for the slight staining. With Pyrocat

HDM, make sure and rate the film about 25 - 32 ISO as you will need

the slight punch, Metol will slow the devloper down a hair (1 stop

actually) which is why the extra stop in exposure. As an alternative

get some EFKE 50, the stuff is a real old fashioned single pour silver

rich emulsion - and you can use Ansel Adams zone technique. If you do

this - remember to meter for the shadows! Then, if your subjects are

women, diffuse when you print, and light the hell out of the subject.

If you do this, they will look ten years younger, and they will all

love you! Remember, even with the EFKE 50, if you use the Pyrocat HDM,

add 1 stop (ISO 25) to make up

[ed farmer - mount laurel,]

Personally (and how else can I answer), I like to work at extremes when I can. TMX and TMZ (sometimes pushed as high as 25,000).

 

For my wedding work, I stay with Tri-X in PMK. I find this to be a very safe combination during rush of work involved there.

[bob fowler]

For 35mm with studio strobes - Pan F+ or FP4+ in Rodinal 1:50. For 4X5 and 5X7, regadrless of lighting, I like the J&C Classic 200 (or even 400) in HC-110. My favorite medium format film isn't available anymore - Verichrome Pan. I loved that stuff in Microdol-X. Agfa APX-100 in Rodinal is another 35mm favorite, but Pan F+ kicks butt. If I'm shooting medium format and want a bit of speed, Tri-X in HC-110 dilution H or Microdol-X 1:3. For a "gritty but sharp" look, Rodinal 1:50. So many films, so little time...

[chat_ming_woo]

Under bright sunlight (high contrast), XP2 Super at ISO200 is good enough. But I have not tried it in studio.