differences in films/top 3 BW

[menjivar]

Ok. I have read and searched and have not been able to find a good explanation between the

different films out there. It seems that almost all manufactures say, "sharp...great

grain...good for availible light"...and so on. What is PAN film? Why do some people hate

TMAX (which is what I have been using)? Does anyone know a good place to learn about

different films? Also, what is everyone's top 3 bw films and why? I know that the best way to

learn the difference is to buy a bunch of film and shoot, but I want to at least make informed

decisions before I buy.

Thanks a bunch.

[bob oldendorf]

Mark , the general answer to your question is that "There is no accounting for

taste."

 

Every film available will have its advocates. That's why each film is sold:

somebody (...and ENOUGH somebodies...) thinks that it's the right tool for a

particular job. To a first approximation, you trade film speed for granularity.

People will jump in with all the exceptions, but a slow film will generally give

you finer grain than a faster film. (But in the real world, the slower shutter

speeds required with slow films might negate any actual increase in apparent

sharpness in the results. That's why there are different films.)

 

"PAN" is an old term from the early days of film - for practical purposes, it just

means that the film is more-or-less responsive to the entire spectrum of visible

light (rather than just the blue end of the spectrum that the old "Ortho" films

saw).

 

Why do people hate TMAX? Because it behaves differently from the films

they learned on.

 

The best place to learn about different films is in your darkroom - - and then

hanging your own work on your own walls.

 

"Top 3 bw films" is certainly an interesting question. You'll get a dozen

different answers, for all sorts of different applications - and the same film can

look distinctly different depending on how it's developed and printed.

 

But, to answer your question - in my case:

 

- I like Tech Pan, because it forces me to work carefully (...good luck finding it

now, though);

 

- I shoot a heck of a lot more TMAX than Tri-X, but, now that you ask, I think I

might still prefer Tri-x for that 'classic' look; and

 

- Fuji Neopan 1600, because I've figured it out , and because it lets me work

a heck of a lot more spontaneously than does Tech Pan.

 

Picking a film is obviously important - but remember that you'll also have to

choose a developer, too. Let us know what route you decide to go.

[menjivar]

Thanks Bob. Right now I am using Tmax 400 and HC-110 dev. I am sticking to this as I

learn the darkroom so that I have fewer variables. I am looking forward to hearing from

other people.

[kaiyen]

I think Bob gave a good, general answer. And that it is best, for now, to stick to general answers. Once you decide there is something about film/dev combo X that you don't like, then we can all talk about whether you should change the film or the dev, or both, to get what you want.

 

I don't think people hate Tmax, it's just that it's different. The tones and the handling are different. I am actually becoming fond of it, though I've only used a few rolls. Once I finish my large stockpile of other films, I might try some more of it.

 

For me..

 

1 - slow films in transition. I was on FP4, now I'm using a lot of Delta 100, and I got a lot of Efke in the freezer. I'm searching for a combination I really like.

 

2 - TriX TriX TriX. I use this classic standby a lot, and its flexibility is really valuable. I use it from 250 to 3200 depending on the situation.

 

3 - Delta 3200. This is my ultra fast film of choice. I just ran out of it and might consider trying others now, though.

 

So, with me, my stuff is in transition. I think I've figure things out closely enough that I can now look for other things to try. The grain with Delta 3200 has become somewhat distracting at times, so I'm going to try out TMZ since it's structure is a bit different. But I stuck with Delta 3200 until I figured out what I did and did not like about it.

 

allan

[kram]

It's been a while since I've developed film but my faves are:

 

1. Agfapan (APX) 100 and 400 in Tmax developer. Wonderful tonality, minimal grain.

2. I used to love Tech Pan too but alas it's gone in roll film. NO grain, wonderful contrast,

super low ISO.

3. Tmax 3200. This film is great with Tmax developer. It even looks good at 6400. It get's

a little clumpy at 12,800. Lovely grain structure.

 

I used to love Plus-X 120, Tri-X in acufine.

[kram]

Forgot to say that TMAX films came out when I used to do a lot of black and white newspaper

ads. I used it as recommended with their developer and the highlights blocked up solid.

That never hapened with Plus-X in D-76 or Microdol.

 

So I hated it for that reason.

Agfapan. Love it.

[chris_waller]

Choice of film depends on so many factors, but my first choice is Ilford Delta 100. And for developer, I use Agfa Rodinal.

[david_beal___richmond_hts.]

You already have the best advice: if you want to learn about film, shoot and develop.

 

Stretch your knowledge. You say your're shooting TMax 400 (aka TMY)? Then shoot a roll at 800, another at 1600, another at 3200. Shoot a roll at 250. Include landscapes, architecture, and people in your test rolls.

 

Shoot under a blazing (Sunny 16) sun. Shoot on a day with blue skies, plenty of sun, and puffy clouds, and use yellow, orange and red filters. See what happens.

 

Go to the Lighting forum on this web site and click on the Administration section. Find the article on single light portraits. Do some (you can, simply by window light, or with a single flash).

 

Shoot a pretty girl with red hair, bright red lipstick and no filter. Now shoot again, but use red, orange, yellow, green filters. See what happens. Try the same thing with a dark haired man (lipstick optional). See what happens.

 

New technology films such as TMX,TMY and TMZ, and Ilford's Delta 100, 400 and 3200, tend to give less grain than conventional ("old technology") films shot at the same speed, BUT they also tend to compress middle tones. Compare your shots of people shot with TMY at 250 with the same subject and light using Tri-X at 250.

 

Good shooting.

 

/s/ David Beal ** Memories Preserved Photography, LLC

[al_kaplan1]

...and then there's the old saying "The worse the quality of your negatives the better printer you'll become" ;-) I like Tri-X in D-76 diluted 1:1 as an everyday always in the camera type of film, rated at about ISO 250. I'm now making the transition to Ilford, which I also like, because Kodak announced that they're getting out of the B&W film business. Unless you have some special reason for another film stick to just one. Get to really know it. Same with developer.

[daniel_gregory]

Mark, there is a good book that can help you get started and not walk in circles. Steve and

Bill break down the films and provide a good explanation of what each type of film does

and what it is primarily used for as well as its shortcomings.

 

The Film Developing Cookbook (Darkroom Cookbook) by Steve Anchell, Bill Troop

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0240802772/qid=1133886991/sr=8-2/

ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i2_xgl14/102-2788482-6096164?n=507846&s=books&v=glance

 

There are two basic types of film: conventional and Tabular. TMax and Delta are examples

of tabular films. They have a different grain structure than conventional. The grains are

flatter and have a different response to light. They are not better or worse, but rather have

different applications. A lot of people don't like TMax, but I agree that it is knowing what

to do with with as a film is what matters. Don Kriby has shot a lot in TMax and I would say

that people who don't like TMax would be amazed at his work.

 

More than just film is developer choice (which is why I recommend the book). Each film

will respond differently in a developer and developer dilution combo. D76 stock and D76

1:3 produce different results on the same film.

 

As for my favorite films right now.

 

1. Efke 25 shoot at 12. It has on the straightest lines very little toe or shoulder. As a Zone

system shooter it just gives me more room to play.

 

2. TriX 320 shoot normally at 160. It is a classic that I like to shoot with good response to

lighting conditions and works well in a variety of developers.

 

3. Acros 100 shoot at 64 and do my N+3/3.5 work in it with Xtol straight at 75 degrees

for 7.5 mins. Does great when their is not a lot of difference in light or tonal range.

[bljkasfdljkasfdljskfa]

Out of Tri-X, HP5+ and Neopan, it looks like Neopan has the best resolution. I've been using HP5+ mostly, and it is much better than Tri-X resolution-wise (fine grain, sharpness). HP5+ has different tone. Neopan seems to have even better resolution than HP5+, and from what I've read pushes better than Tri-X.

[image creations]

Back when I was doing alot of B&W my absolute favorite was TechPan 2415 ( I still have about 50') but I see absolutely no replacement available. If you used a tripod when shooting, printing a 35mm neg to a 32 X 40 was possible. For people and non action shots I would use plusX and when I needed to capture motion I would often use TriX and push it to 1600. The absolute best thing though has aready been stated: experiment, experiment, experiment. Find out what differences the films you find have, how they capture and portray your subject, and find what you like best and use it.

[menjivar]

Thanks everyone. I really appreciate the comments and am encouraged for at least another 2

weeks. Then I will post again. =)

[weldon_byrns]

I'm now making the transition to Ilford, which I also like, because Kodak announced that they're getting out of the B&W film business. Unless you have some special reason for another film stick to just one. Get to really know it. Same with developer.

 

Did I miss a post? I knew Kodak was out of the BW paper business but film too?

[bobbyc]

Since everyones focusing Kodak, let me put in a word for Ilford:

Ilford pan f 50 for Medium format,

Ilford FP4 for large format,

Ilford HP5 for 35 mm.

Try different combinations of Ilford chemistry and see what appeals to you.

[profhlynnjones]

First: Color Blind or Commercial films are sensitive to UV and Blue only. Orthochromatic films are sensitive to UV, Blue and Green. Panchromatic films are sensitive to UV, blue, green, and red. Fortunatley, most modern films have "rare earth" glasses which are opaque to UV, so that is not a problem.

 

The great "100 speed" group films, Delta 100, TMX, and Neopan Acros are all terrific, should be used with compensating developers such a Rodinal or D76 1:1, and they are all different in speed and interesting qualities. A good photographer might use all three of them under different circumstances.

 

The greatest general purpose film I have used in my more than 1/2 century of experience is the new Plus X ASA125 (which Kodak says it didn't change, hogwash, the change was massive and altogether positive). Developed in full strength D76 it is a 160 film, in Acufine it is 200. It easily tolerated 24X of enlargement before showing any visible grain.

 

The film that was once my most hated (TMY 400) after the new Kodak coating alley became my favorite 400 speed film. Superb in D76, UFG, and Acufine. After the new coating alley, I find that I can't use Tri X at all anymore, it sucketh now. I still like Neopan 400 in fine grain soups like Acufine and UFG,

 

In super high speed, Delta 3200 is now my only choice.

 

email me if you want some film and developer information.

 

Lynn