Best Portrait film in natural lighting?

[mark5]

Im wanting to do some Portraits outside in natural lighting in B&W, What would you recomend for this and would you use any filters and why? Also do you prefere Fill flash or no fill flash?

Thanks

[j._patric_dahl_n]

I took a couple of portraits outdoors last month. I took them in the

shadow against a house wall. The film I used was Agfa APX 25, shot at

12 Asa. The camera was a Rolleiflex TLR 3,5 Tessar (from 1938). I had

a Rolleisoft/Duto 0 and a light green filter. I used Agfas recipe 8,

a superb portrait developer with Glycin.

 

<p>

 

The results were stunning! Looong tonal scale, and have never seen so

good skin tones before.

 

<p>

 

I guess APX 100 will work great too, at 50 Asa. Other nice films I

would use are Efke R 50 and R 25. They were made to be great portrait

films from the beginning. They are ortopanchromatic, so you don't

need a green filter with them. No filters even indoors using lamps.

 

<p>

 

This is my version of Agfa 8 film developer:

 

<p>

 

Glycin, Normal contrast

 

<p>

 

Warm Water (125 F / 52 C) - 750 ml

Sodium sulfite, Anhydrous - 12,5 g

Glycin - 2 g

Sodium Carbonate 22,5 g

Add cold water to make 1000 ml.

 

<p>

 

Develop films from 5 to 12 minutes at 68 F (20 C)

[ted_kaufman]

I suggest HP5+, Delta 400 (new), Fuji Neopan 400 or any of the b&w

chromogenic films made for processing in C-41 color chemistry. The

reason? 400 speed films are inherently lower in contrast than slower

films in the ISO 100 range. Also, the higher speed films have more

grain and the grain tends to smooth facial imperfections.

 

<p>

 

Of even greater concern is lighting. Generally speaking, for basic

portraiture you want softer light, such as open shade. A classic

lighting technique is simple north light. To achieve this, position

your subject facing north, with no direct sunlight hitting the face.

One easy solution is to place your subject against a wall that looks

north. The reason this works so nicely is the wall eliminates direct

sunlight while the northern sky reflects the sun, which shines from

the southern half of the sky. Thus, the entire northern sky

effectively becomes a huge reflector, providing full, even lighting.

North light is also a very sharp light, revealing great detail, but

without the harshness of direct sunlight. One final note about

choosing your location: the northern sky should be as open as

possible, unbroken by large trees, buildings and so forth.

 

<p>

 

Obviously, north light is not the only effective light. But I

strongly recommend you begin with this quality of light and learn to

recognize its subtleties. It's not by accident that the great master

painters had north-facing skylights in their studios.

 

<p>

 

As for fill flash, I recommend you avoid it for now. It takes

considerable experience to learn to use fill flash effectively so

that it looks natural. In fact, unless you have a flash you can

remove from your camera and bounce from a wall of a ceiling, I

suggest you do away with it altogether for portraiture. If you need

fill, get yourself some sheets of white foam-core board in

1/4"x30"x40" size, and have a friend hold it up close to the model on

the side you wish to fill. You should also try holding it under the

model's face, parallel to the ground. Observe how this lightens dark

circles under the eyes and is especially effective for softening

wrinkles.

 

<p>

 

Filters? If you do all the other stuff I recommended, you probably

don't need filters. With that said, however, keep in mind that a

given color filter lightens the same color in your subject.

Therefore, if your subject has red, blotchy skin--acne, age spots,

etc.--a red (#25) or orange (O2 or #21) filter will help

considerably. Some say a yellow or green filter yields richer skin

tones, but I have never found them particularly useful.

 

<p>

 

Lastly, experiment a lot. Do it straight and classic, then do it

again and break the "rules." The bottom line is there is never only

one way to take a photograph. That is the endless joy of

photography; the countless opportunities for variation are always

yours for the taking.

 

<p>

 

Good luck and have fun!

[charlie_strack]

If you can use 120 size, use Verichrome Pan. Filters would depend on

the background, but probably not. Fill flash, depends on the nature

of the existing light. Generally not if you've got soft light.

[ryuji_suzuki]

Is the model male or female?

 

<p>

 

As Ted said, I suggest that you forget about film and focus on

lighting unless you already learned a lot about it. Natural light

is easy to start with and difficult to perfect.

A Fill flash

is effective but it's not the easiest thing, at least if you want

something more than auto-everything result. I suggest you begin with a

reflector.

 

<p>

 

As a starting point, I suggest Plus-X. No filter for male, a yellow or

orange filter for female. Develop in ID-11 1+1. Indeed, this is my

favorite for usual portraits.

[j._patric_dahl_n]

Ted wrote:

 

<p>

 

"I suggest HP5+, Delta 400 (new), Fuji Neopan 400 or any of the b&w

chromogenic films made for processing in C-41 color chemistry. The

reason? 400 speed films are inherently lower in contrast than slower

films in the ISO 100 range. Also, the higher speed films have more

grain and the grain tends to smooth facial imperfections."

 

<p>

 

 

Oh, I must say that we all have different taste in photography and

portraits! That's great! :-)

 

<p>

 

However, I recommend a low/medium speed film that you overexpose one

step and then shorten the developing time with circa 30%. That will

give lower contrast and finer grain. A large aperture and a

softfilter will smoothen the skin.

 

<p>

 

 

When I shot the portraits I was talking about above, I shot APX 25

and 12 Asa, and used 1/10 sec speed on the shutter... I got very low

contrast, but not too low, and I developed the paper, Emaks K888,

grade 2, in undiluted Ansco 130. I wish I had a scanner do I could

show you the results. :-)

 

<p>

 

I've heard very good things about Verichrome pan, but that film isn't

sold here in Sweden. I hope I can buy a couple of rolls someday

before Kodak discontinue it.

[j._patric_dahl_n]

Ted, a red filter will give you a portrait of a ghost instead of a

living human. With an orange filter, maybe a zombie. :-) White lips

aren't attractive.

 

<p>

 

I use a light yellow filter or a light green filter for portraits or

for everyday photography. I love the tonality. But that depends of

course on the light I'm shooting in.

 

<p>

 

Before you take the photos you should think about how you want the

results to be like. Then check the possibilities, if you need a

filter to correct the light, if you want a softfilter and so on. It's

good to plan how you're going to develop the film, the Asa seetings

and so on...

[ted_kaufman]

"Ted, a red filter will give you a portrait of a ghost instead of a

living human. With an orange filter, maybe a zombie. :-) White lips

aren't attractive."

 

<p>

 

Patrick: Have you ever actually *used* a red or orange filter for

portraiture, or are you going by what you've heard or think it should

look like? The fact is, those filters do yield a somewhat unusual

tonal palate, but the effect is far from ghastly. It's actually very

appealing. Have you ever seen a portrait done with TechPan film? It

has enhanced red sensitivity--orthochromatic--and therefore produces

a tonality much like that of panochromatic films exposed through a

red or orange filter. You only need to search to posts here to

discover how lovely portraits done on TP can be. If you want fine

grain, you can't get any finer than TP and you'll be shocked at how

beautiful portraits can look with it. Try it in Photographer's

Formulary TD-3 developer.

 

<p>

 

Incidentally, I recommended 400 speed films to the original poster

because he is not experienced. Those films will forgive small

mistakes and thereby encourage continued exploration. Make a mistake

in exposure or processing with APX25 (or TP, for that matter) and it

will look awful.

[floren_pge]

Hmmm. Old technology films in the 100 to 400 range. I like FP4+ in

120. I've also had succes with HP5+ also in 120. Natural light is

peachy.

 

<p>

 

Cheerio

[j._patric_dahl_n]

Ted, yes I have used red and orange filters and didn't like the

results. With the red filter I got pale ghost-like skintones and

white lips. With the orange filter the result was similar to Tech Pan

without filter, pale skin and a face with two days old beard the

person looked sick. At least in my eyes. The taste is different and

how the filters will work depends of course on the light conditions.

 

<p>

 

Some day I will try Technical Pan with a cyan/bluegreen filter and

develop with a catechol developer instead of the expensive Technidol.

But for now, I'm happy with Efke films.

 

<p>

 

You're right about that some films are more forgiving than others,

but that's true even with low and medium speed films. For instance,

Efke R100 is much more forgiving than APX100.

[christian_harkness]

Mark, I have been using a #25 red filter with Fuji Neopan 1600 and

400 for a couple of years now, with a lot of my portraits, and I love

the results. It does depend on the person's skin tone, and a lot of

other factors. So, I usually take shots with and without the filter.

I think it is worth a try.

 

<p>

 

chris

 

<p>

 

ChristianHarkness.tripod.com