Anyone use 3200 speed often?

[erik_hornung]

I thought I would try a roll of 3200 for some non-important shots at

the reception at this weekends wedding.

 

I'd like to hear any of your experiences with 3200...i'll probably be

using t-max. I know it's grainy, but i'd like to see if I like that

look or not. And I also know 3200 is difficult to have developed.

 

Input? Advice? Suggestions? Tips?

 

Mahalo,

 

Erik :)

[btmuir]

Erik, i don't shoot weddings but T-Max 3200 can be quite exceptable to most people,

grain wize and does give a certain look. I process my own B&W and have had poor results

with commercial B&W processing so YMMV. I've used it for available light stuff and I rate it

for 800 to 1250 or there about. I've even printed to 11x14 and it wasn't too bad. Try some

and you may like it.

[johnmarkpainter]

Erik,

 

If you are shooting in REALLy low light it will be thin. I am talking about the kind of light

where you are shooting f2 @ 1/15 at 3200.

 

Try shooting at 1250-1600 if you can and let the lab process as normal.

 

jmp

[mike dixon]

I shoot a lot of Delta 3200 at EI 1600 or 3200 depending on how little light there is. I develop it myself. For weddings, I show prospective clients examples so they'll know how the final images will look like in terms of grain and tonality.<P>

<i>Try shooting at 1250-1600 if you can and let the lab process as normal.</i><P>

D3200 and TMax 3200 are ISO 800 to 1000 films. When exposed at 3200, they need a two-stop push. A friend who has commercial development done of TMax 3200 exposes at 3200 but has the lab develop it as if it were exposed at 6400 (three-stop push).

[miguel a. sánchez]

Erik, when I shoot a wedding I always have a second camera (35mm or 120) whit a 3200 speed film inside. This is cause I love shoot frames without flash light to keep the "feeling" of the original scene, you know? I usually use T-max for 35mm and Delta for 120/220

I develop my own rolls and I think the grain and the looks of the prints are wonderful!

In my portfolio of weddings you can see some examples of my work with these films...

 

Miguel A. Sᮣhez

[fotografz]

I've always had good results shooting Illford's Delta 3200 rating it a stop under or so. The

trick is to not get too ambitious with it in terms of cheating the light, thinking it'll be okay

to underexpose a bit just to get the shot.

 

If you think you may want to incorporate 3200 into your regular wedding shooting routine,

you may want to get the supplies to process it yourself. I've experienced much better

results doing that than from any lab.

 

Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your POV), this is where the newer digital

cameras really shine. Properly exposed ISO 3200 RAW files processed carefully are

stunning, and the noise actually makes it look a little like 400 speed film.

[katie h.]

I have one camera loaded with either Delta 3200 or Portra 800 at most weddings. I shoot the Delta at 1600 and have my lab develop for 3200. It can make for some really lovely shots and I think it does a great job showing the tonalities of whites on the bride's dress. I love that film for "getting ready shot." I do try to show a few shots to my customers beforehand to see how/if they like the look. Have fun.

 

Katie<div></div>

[al_kaplan1]

Real film speed hasn't increased in over 40 years since the days of Kodad Royal-X Pan Recording (only available in bulk) followed by 2475 Recording which was eventually released in 36 exposure cassettes as well. These films were rated at ASA (ISO) 1250 but could be pushed in Acufine to 3200. They were extremely grainy. When Diafine developer hit the market, giving 1250 easily with Tri-X, coupled with a wider selection of good high speed lenses, a lot of photographers stopped using the recording films.

 

Today's "3200" emulsions are finer grain than the ones of the 1960's and 1970's, but today's Tri-X is a far different creature too, with MUCH finer grain. B&W films in general give varying results in different developers and developer dilutions. If you just want speed try to get by with Ti-X in Diafine. If it's "the Look" you're seeking you really have to figure on shooting a number of rolls to determine the best speed, which developer and developing time/dilution to give you what you want. It ain't like color where Kodak tells you the exact time and temperature to use with C-41 chemistry and that's that.

 

You can get set up to develop your own negatives these days for next to nothing as people dump their darkroom goodies in the mad rush to "be modern". Likely as not you'll still be able to buy film, paper, and chemistry in 20 years, although it might be at the art supply. You'l really regret not having bought that cheap darkroom equipment as prices from the few remaining makers soar. Even now, at the retail level you can get a LOT more money for gelatin silver B&W prints than for color ones.

[erik_hornung]

Wow, thanks for all the responses! I posted the message, went to bed, and this morning there were a gazillion responses!

 

I'm looking forward to using this new film - even though I have a feeling it's going to be VERY expensive to have developed as I don't do any developing myself.

 

Thanks again!

 

Erik :)

[r.m.]

I actually like to push the Fuji NP1600 to 3200. Very fine grained film, and I love the results. I find the Delta 3200 grain to be a bit clunky. I just recently tried Kodak's 3200 film and am waiting to see the results in print...

[stacy]

I shoot a couple rolls per wedding normally at 1600- mostly for getting ready and dancing, but sometimes I'll shoot some I the daylight as well- just for effect. It's a fun film- very grainy...<div></div>

[mattalofs]

"I actually like to push the Fuji NP1600 to 3200."

 

Reina, what developer, time and temp? I've had good results with Neopan 1600 @ 3200 in HC110.

 

Erik, you can get the chemistry and supplies you need to process your own B&W negs for less than $50 and the loss of infinite amounts of your time ;) I'd do what Al says and start with Diafine and TriX; Diafine is easier to use than most B&W developers. Time and temperature are pretty much irrelevant with it, and it keeps for ever.

[think27]

I show couples examples of Kodak 3200 usually rated at 1600 or 800 - depending on the available light. If they like it (most do) - I use it in church. Probably 90% of church weddings. I also use it on drizzily dark days - outdoors for some artsy shots. I have an 11x14 on my wall of a couple walking on a tree lined dirt road that is just beautiful. Grainy but soft and moody. I find that I need to be careful to expose spot on or 1/2 stop over for a good print. I've used this film for about 8 years and I love it! <p> I'd love to see some more examples of other high speed films for comparison. Sometimes I think - "if it ain't broke don't fix it" but having never tried any other high speed film - I'm curious.<div></div>

[stacy]

Mary- Your B&W images are nice- very warm. Do you have them printed with a light sepia?

[r.m.]

Hi Matt. I use dd-x at the stated times. Here's an example...<div></div>

[r.m.]

another...<div></div>

[kevin m.]

If you want to shoot color, Fuji's new 1600 film is pretty nice. More grain and slightly contrastier than NPH.

 

If you find yourself shooting at such high iso's all the time, digital capture is much cleaner looking.<div></div>

[mattalofs]

Nice midtones Reina. I'll have to give that a shot.

[peter_silvia1]

This image was shot on 3200, exposed@ 1600 and lab processed. Original image was too flat so I punched it up in PS.<div></div>

[peter_silvia1]

In my search for a high speed b+w that could be lab processed I tried Fuji 1600 color neg, exposed @ 1250 and then converted to grayscale in PS.Compare to the previous image.<div></div>

[peter_silvia1]

This image shot at the ceremony using the Fuji 1600, converted in PS.<div></div>

[maxmalossini]

As far as labs that do a good job on tmax3200 or delta3200, I would definitely recommend San Miguel Phot Lab (http://www.bestlab.com/). They provide professional quality service, and the price is fair with several options, including scans.

Take care,

MM

[think27]

Stacy - That is my lab.. They print my 3200 on color paper and this is how it comes to me when I get my CD from them. They know I like all my work on the warm side. Thanks..

[tomweis]

I use Delta 3200 @ 1600. Delta 3200 and Kodak TMZ both are really about ASA 1250 according to spec sheets. I used Lexington B&W in NYC for a few rolls from a wedding because I was in a hurry. The lab was recommended by a fellow photographer. Unfortunately, they butchered my film by overdeveloping it - about N+2. Highlights were bulletproof. It was so bad I took the film and reduced it in a solution of potassium ferricyanide. My point is that you won't get that same latitude you get with C-41 films. As a general rule, T-grained films are fussy and need to be exposed carefully (like chromes) and developed carefully. Testing the film & developer (or lab) combination first is highly recommended. I will always process the 3200 film myself and then have machine prints made for proofs.

[scott ream]

I've used Delta 3200 which I developed and printed myself. I shot it at 1600 but developed with the normal time/temp. The look is great but I really wouldn't trust anyone else for development of it. Contrast needs to be punched up a bit whien printing.