High Speed (Concert) Film: HP5/Delta3200, Xtol/Rodinol?

[PatrickMP]

<p>I've been trying to do some shooting at local concerts lately using flash, and haven't had any good results. Flash usually drowns out the great ambient lighting that you get at a concert, and I'm sure that I'm irritating more than one person with the flash going off at almost full intensity (I've been shooting with a manual focus camera set at f/8 so that I can use zone-focus, that way I don't have to focus on the fly as long as my subject is at least 1.5m away).</p>

<p>That said, I'd like to try out some natural light with B&W. My usual stock of film is FP4+ or HP5+ developed in Xtol. I also have some (unopened) bottles of Rodinol. I'd like to shoot the film at either 3200 or 6400 (I'll either be using f/2.0 or f/2.8 lens, depending on which setup I bring that day). So, my main questions:</p>

 

<ul>

<li>HP5+ pushed to 3200/6400, or Ilford Delta 3200 at 3200/pushed to 6400?</li>

<li>Xtol or Rodinol? I've experimented with Rodinol in HP5+ and wasn't too happy with the results, but that was without calibrating my setup, and rating the film at 320.</li>

</ul>

<p>I'd prefer <em>not</em> to start using a new developer as I'm trying to simplify my darkroom process (don't use it much as is, so the less stuff I have in there the better). </p>

<p>Any suggestions?</p>

<p>Thanks!<br>

-Patrick</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Skip the Rodinal unless it's used with Delta 3200 at 800-1600; or HP5+ at 800, tops. Years ago when I shot concerts for newspaper reproduction I normally used Tri-X pushed to 800 and souped in HC-110 because Rodinal-souped Tri-X was often too grainy and thin even for low quality newspaper reproduction.</p>

<p>Delta 3200 is nearly ideal for contrasty stage lighting. Its only flaw is popcorn grain, but it'll handle the contrast and push very well. I've never been a fan of Xtol and never used it to push anything so I can't comment on how well it'll do with Delta 3200. Technically the true speed of Delta 3200 is closer to 1200-1600, but it'll handle pushes very well - but it's better with a developer suited to pushing. I got very poor results with Delta 3200 at 3200 in ID-11 for local theatrical performances, and Rodinal would have been worse. (I eventually switched to Microphen and have been very satisfied with it.)</p>

<p>Shooting at f/8 will put you at a real disadvantage. Stage lighting is usually EV 8, maximum, and can go lower than EV 4 (imagine a candle light dinner). With a film rated at 3200 your shutter speeds will be around 1/15th-1/125th depending on lighting. If possible try a faster aperture and practice adjusting focus as needed.</p>

[Spearhead]

<blockquote>

<p>Flash usually drowns out the great ambient lighting that you get at a concert, and I'm sure that I'm irritating more than one person with the flash going off at almost full intensity</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /> This sounds like a technique problem as there's no reason for the flash to drown out the ambient lighting if you properly manage it. Cut down the flash, bounce it off side walls, the ceiling or a bounce card and you can preserve the ambient and get good photos. Before I started using flash, I might get two shots out of 50 that were really good at some shows. With flash, it's a lot easier. Also, people are only bothered if you pop the flash in their face. Most shows have a lot of people with small digicams and the flash going off, everyone is used to it. I have an article <a href="../learn/club-photography/photographing-bands-musicians/">here on photo.net</a> on shooting concerts. I shoot shows with digital cameras now but I've done a lot of the same shooting with film, and it all ends up being about the light, which is almost always too low where I shoot without flash, and it just takes mastering the light.</p>

[dweezil]

<p>I use HP5+ pushed to 3200 in rodinal for concerts;<br>

That seems to work for me</p>

<div></div>

[dave_wilson1]

<p>At one time I shot many concerts and performances for publication in various periodicals. My two main films were TriX shot at around 800 and given extra development, HC110, sometimes D76. Later on I shot everything on color film, usually Fuji 1600 and just had the local machine process it and printed what I wanted through proper filtration to get good solid black and white. Like Jeff said, if you add flash use less, bounce it, whatever, and f8? I shoot everything wide open, but if adding flash I would sit around f4 and add the flash gently. OK, have fun! That's what it's all about. </p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>Look at http://www.flickr.com/photos/peterbcarter/sets/72157622674774965/</p>

<p>Rodinal 1:100 2hr stand. It's amazing how many people say it can't be done. It not only can, it can be done well.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Erwin, other than the musician's exposed skin, I'm not seeing any details in that photo. It also looks like it was taken with flash, altho' the reflections could be due to the stage lights. It's pretty much what I got with HP5+ or Tri-X pushed in Rodinal beyond 800, which is why I switched to a more appropriate developer. Rodinal is not particularly well suited to pushing.</p>

<p>Peter, those photos in your Flickr portfolio appear to have been taken in daylight. Do you have any photos taken at night, in concerts or theatrical performances using the same film, exposure and development process? The light really does matter. And stand development in Rodinal does not increase speed. It can help minimize certain contrast problems, but will not make an ISO 400 film behave like Delta 3200.</p>

<p>I'm not disparaging anyone's personal aesthetics here. If you happen to like the look of the results you're getting with your preferred materials and processes, that's all that matters. But there are other materials and processes that will deliver noticeably better results if you want less chalk-and-soot contrast, more tonal clarity in the low mid tones and negatives that are easier to print conventionally (rather than scanning).</p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>Yes, daylight they are. I have not had the opportunity to photograph any bands (at night) as of late. It's simply not been my focus. Time to expand some interests... ;)</p>

[PatrickMP]

<p>G'day group.</p>

<p>Thanks for all of the responses. To be clear, I was explaining my current process (f/8 to utilize zone focus), not proposed future process. With regards to the flash and technique. Using straight TTL the camera was metering as expected, trying to balance out the entire scene. As a result, the subject was properly exposed but the dramatic lighting was lost. Examples of the same subject, from the same relative position can be found with flash ( http://www.d26.net/offsite/pics/da_singer_flash.jpg ) and without flash ( http://www.d26.net/offsite/pics/da_singer_noflash.jpg ). For my next set of tests I'll likely be wide open at f/2.0.</p>

<p>Cheers,<br>

-Patrick</p>

<p> </p>

[tim gray]

<p>I shot some concerts with Tri-X at 1250 in Diafine or TMZ at 1600 or 3200 in XTOL 1:1. I thought they came out alright. Delta 3200 should be able to pull off the 1600 or 3200 in XTOL 1:1 just as well as the TMZ did.</p>

<p>Use the F/2.0 lens. A spot meter on your camera helps. </p>

[thomas_graichen]

<p>i can just repeat the idea of tri-x rodinal and stand<br /> development - have a look at<br /> <br /> /> <br /> this is f1.7 at 1/60 (equal to around iso1600...3200 at<br /> that light) ... a link with some more info on how development<br /> was done i had added to this picture<br /> <br /> /> <br /> might be worth a try - but you should play around with it,<br /> before you use it seriously<br /> <br /> best wishes - thomas</p>