Which B&W film

[pat_cahir]

Hi,

I am going on holidays (Asia) soon and would like to take a few rolls of B&W

film with me for Portraits and may use 400 speed film on overcast days. I have

AGFA 100, Ilford Delta 100 and 400, Tmax 400 and Tri-X. I only ever shot one

roll of B&W before so any comments on the above film swould be appreciated. Are

they all user friendly? Is it suitable to shoot on a sunny day? I am using

mainly slide film which I always expose for the highlights, what about B&W? I

shall be in China, Korea and Japan. I suppose Japan would be the best place for

developing. Is that correct? I know most people suggest developing B&W oneself

but that is not really an option for me. Incidently, the camera is an EOS 3 but

I don't think that makes a difference.

Many thanks,

Pat

[jtk]

If you're not going to process your own, use a film that processes C-41 (and you don't have it) because you can't rely on finding traditional labs.

 

Also, you're selling yourself short if you plan on B&W without first shooting and processing a few rolls.

 

Perhaps it'd be easier for you to shoot color negative film, intending to convert to B&W? Works fine, especially if you dislike grain. I love grain, so that's rarely my own strategy.

[asher]

John's right, as above. Pick just one emulsion and test the heck out of it before you go.

Juggling even just 2 emulsions might knock off your rhythm.<p>

 

I'm finding that Plus X is a good all-purpose film especially if you will be developing it

yourself and scanning. Tri-X is great too, but not if you'll be shooting in bright daylight a lot.

XP2 is a good C-41 B&W film but does not respond well to over-exposure, so ditto as for Tri-

X.

[yann1]

Why Japan the best place for developing ? Not at all, it depends where you go... Extremely difficult in Kyoto and Osaka for example C41 films is a good advice, Ilford XP2 is probably the best. For all purpose 400 films I prefer HP5 & tri x.

[gnashings]

All the films you list are excellent and very capable. The question is taste, and if I was to pick one I would go with TriX because I think it may be the single most flexible emulsion on the planet. Then again thats one man`s taste.

 

Having said that, I can`t echo the sentiments voiced above strongly enough: any film you shoot will require you to know what you want and how to get it, and that only comes with practice.

 

I am not a big fan of the C41 B&W emulsions, but that is strictly a matter of taste, and I would certainly second the suggestion of XP2 for someone who is looking to get some quality B&W without getting into the developing game. Its a quality product and can give great results.

[michael_kwiatkowski]

With b&w film the general rule is to expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights.

However, when having someone else do the processing you expose for the shadows then hope. I

don't know what method you use for metering, but try metering the darkest area of the scene you

want detail in then close down 1-2 stops. If the scene has low contrast close down 1 stop, if higher

contrast 2 stops. This should enable you to capture what is in the shadows with less chance of

"blocking up" the highlights. This is just a general guide though. You should also have an idea on what

speed you should rate the film at. The number on the box is just a guideline. You should really shoot

some and have it developed to get an idea the manufacturers number is in line with your exposures.

Tmax is a good film but does best with more precise exposure and development. The same goes for

the Ilford delta films although they are a bit more forgiving. The Agfa and the tri-X are the most

forgiving film you mentioned.

Tokyo has quite a few places where you can have your film developed if you are going there. Many

people over there still love film and it still holds a place of respect. If you are in Tokyo, go to

Yodobashi Camera in Shinjuku and they should be able to steer you in the right direction.

I love traveling in that part of the world. You should have a great trip.

[brucecahn]

Too bad they don't make Tri-X 320 in 35mm. That would be some film. The 400 TX is excellent. Delta and TMax are too contrasty for many lighting situations. Agfa is very good. You are best off picking one film only, as has been suggested. For me it would be Agfa 400, if I could get some. In 35mm, Tri-X 400 is OK. Lately I have been using Rollei R3 in 35mm. It is a bit grainy in big enlargements, but it is a beautiful grain. Smaller prints are gorgeous. But for travel I still would prefer Agfa 400 or Tri-X.

[yann1]

They do make tri-x 320 in 35 mm Bruce.

[sumo_kun]

Since you are travelling and won't know exactly what conditions you will be shooting in, I would recommend you get a good all round film. You are travelling here, not on a serious photo shoot so worrying about getting every last bit of quality from a film is a bit of a waste of time. I'd choose Tri-X as my only film (actually, Fuji Neopan 400, but you didn't mention it, so the Kodak gets the vote) and just shoot away using your camera meter rated at 400. The EOS 3 is a high class camera and it will meter properly (if not damn close) pretty much in every situation. If you shoot slides, you no doubt have some knowledge of exposure. The same general rules apply for B+W but you need to expose for the shadows, as mentioned earlier so if you feel a bit nervous leaving things to the camera, go for slight over-exposure. Tri-X is a very forgiving film both for shooting and in terms of developing. 400 is a good speed for darker places and bright places. For sunny 16, you will have a shutter speed of 1/500. For darker interiors, something like 1/30 at f2 will result, not an impossible speed to use, and there's always flash if you are desperate.

 

As you say, developing is best done yourself, but is not an option. Out of the 3 countries, I would also guess that Japan has the best film developing prospects. China? I wouldn't trust most places there with my film. I've never been to Korea so I can't comment but I live in Japan and I can say that the film services here are absolutely top notch in terms of availability and quality. Obviously Tokyo has the biggest choice. Osaka has a load of places too. Kyoto slightly less but Kyoto is not the place to go if you want to shop for modern conveniences. Osaka is like 30mins away and is the place for shopping. Kyoto is for taking pictures. If you want good B+W work done, search out a branch of Horiuchi Color. They have a branch in most big cities. I used them before I started my own development and they did a very fine job. You can get them to push/pull (for a fee) and get real contact prints done. They have been the only lab I have used that still do real B+W prints on real paper (albeit RC). A "pro" lab in the UK I used once did a good job of processing but did digital contacts and prints. It was not impressive. Other labs include Yodobashi and Bic Camera. Some branches of Bic actually send out to Horiuchi Color. The one in Nagoya does. And of course there are numerous little shops that offer process and prints type services. For real B+W though, I'd stick to Horiuchi. They are Kodak specialists so will know how to handle Tri-X well.

 

Finally, I would advise you to enjoy the trip and not think too much about the technicalities of photography. Since you are not developing yourself there is not much you can do to control the look of the developed negatives so just forget about it, leave it to the lab and shoot away. Things can always be tweaked in the darkroom or photoshop if you are so inclined. B+W negatives are very flexible in terms of exposure compared to colour slides so slight over/under exposure will not matter. Have fun!

[pics]

I'd agree with many others in recommending Tri-X. You can get away with shooting it at EI's of anywhere from 200-3200 if need be. I would also suggest familiarizing yourself with its characteristics and perhaps learn some info on film developing before you make an attempt on anything important. Another thing to consider is bringing 2 bodies. One loaded with a 100 speed film (or Tri-X rated at 200) for daytime shooting, and another with faster (or pushed film) for the night or low-light shooting. This is hardly an absolutely necessary thing to do, but it can make life easier since you won't have to waste or constantly reload different rolls based on the lighting conditions.

[pics]

and no, Kodak doesn't make Tri-X 320 in 35mm. Unless you are shooting in a studio with controlled lighting I'd stick to standard Tri-X 400 anyway.

[brucecahn]

Yann & Daniel: So they make the 320 in 35mm, yes or no. Guess I can find out on the B&H site. If they do it is something new, and am surprised because they are not adding films, or are they? This is a fabulous film shot at 125 and done in D76 1:1. It makes beautiful enlargements of 10X or more and even better contact prints in LF. Both Jock Sturges and Nicholas Nixon use it in 8x10 and they are known for great prints.

[pics]

Bruce,

 

No it isn't available in 35mm. I don't doubt that some people get great results from it, but more than a few people get stunning prints from Tri-X 400 (and just about every other film) as well. In the end it depends on taste and technique I suppose. I just never felt like the 320 film was well suited for my tastes and shooting. Muddy and compressed shadow detail and a tendency towards "hot" highlights is my experience with it. Of course if one is so inclined to spend a great deal of time with this film I'm sure great prints are possible in all types of lighting conditions. Personally I find Tri-X 400 to be far more versatile and superior in "every day" shooting environments. Interesting topic though. Here's a recent thread discussing the 2 films.

 

 

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00LfYh

[yann1]

Am I deaming, Or my Kodak shop sold me a roll of tri x 35 mm 320 last year ? Well I might have made a mistake, but I must go back there and find out to be able to sleep tonight.

[yann1]

... Huhh... There's no tri-x 320 in 135, I think I need to take a break and a long vacation.

[pat_cahir]

I would just like thank everone for the helpful respnses. I shall try and get as much of film processed in the Horiuchi Color labs. I will be in China and Korea for 4 weeks before reaching Japan so I think b&w will be okay waiting that long, though most of my slide film is velvia so I don't think it would ideal to wait that long to process. I have found a few recommended labs in China and Korea through photo.net. Incidently, does Horiuchi Labs still processkodachrome?

Thanks again.

Pat

[sumo_kun]

Yes, according to their website, they still process K-14. It's a little over 1000 yen for sleeved normal processing and 1300 or so with mounts.

[wolf_rainer_schmalfuss]

I would like to point out, that the ROLLEI R3 B&W film, with its cubic crystals, mentioned here by Bruce Cahn, with its three layers technology, is international very popular. Beside the films, one can expect, particularly in Korea, a competent specialized development, also in small cities, even with ROLLEI original chemistry. This is also a concise example, for the imperturbable loyalty of the Asiatic photographers in the analogue B&W photography. I take the liberty to implement here briefly, that the exports of the European photo industry are regarding traditional products, e.g. precious middle format analogue cameras, also in combination with B&W roll films, on a very high level. I determined these data, surprising for me, from export statistics, above all the German photo industry. This is also to the surprise of many photo future strategists, who did not probably foresee, that international professional photographers and fastidious photographers remained faithful invariably also for the proven film medium. Of Japan and Korea, one spoke concretely there: Here I can insure from own knowledge, that probably "supply problems" straight in Korea; with high-quality B&W products not come. In this connection I am pleased above all, also the press information from the KODAK, which is encountered extraordinarily, large interest now straight in Europe: There it stands, that up to 60% of the professional photographers invariably work with similar film material.

 

Cheers