best at iso 1600 - 35mm

[mauro_franic]

<p>What's more important, my daughter approved it before delivery:</p><div></div>

[dave_gustafson1]

<p>My vote is for HP5 and push it two stops. Way back when I shot an open shade portrait using Delta 3200 rated at 1600 and HP5 +2 and for me HP5 was the clear winner. If reducing the amount of grain is important to you, it doesn't even come close.</p>

[mauro_franic]

<p>Faster film will produce larger grain but retain the midtones more effectively.</p>

<p>For example:<br>

- Tmax 400 at EI 1600 produces larger grain than Tmax 100 at EI 1600, but it will retain the midtones better.<br>

- Tmax 3200 produces larger grain than Tmax 400 at EI 3200, but it will retain the midtones better.</p>

[mauro_franic]

<p>This is TMAX 3200 at 6400:</p><div></div>

[mauro_franic]

<p>This is TMAX 400 at 3200:</p><div></div>

[mauro_franic]

<p>All things considered, if 1600 speed is needed, I would use TMAX 400 and push it just 10% development time.</p>

<p>If the goal is grain or contrast management I prefer TMAX 100.</p>

<p> </p>

[jay_de_fehr]

<blockquote>

<p>The shots were taken at 1/125 sec f11 I believe.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Mauro,</p>

<p>Unless I'm missing something, and the above refers to the image posted, and the processing was TMX for 10.5 min @ 80F, then your film wasn't pushed at all, but over exposed and grossly over developed. Since we can see the sun in your photo, and no clouds, we can reasonably apply the Sunny 16 rule, which indicates an exposure of 1/100 sec @ f/16. If you exposed for 1/125 @ f/11, you over exposed your film by one stop. This is not pushing, by any reasonable definition of the term. </p>

[helinophoto]

<p>Ha.....hello from the future, old thread.</p>

<p>Found this thread when googling about for some info on Neopan 1600 and just wanted to comment on that claim, to push TMax 100 to 1600 or even 3200.</p>

<p>I've had pretty crappy results, even trying to push Tri-X to 1600 and even crappy results with Neopan 1600 @1600 (HC-110). All these occasions have been dark setting, where you need a higher sensitivity film.<br>

Always wondered why my pushed negatives looked so bad, but I think it has an easy explanation:</p>

<p>You cannot really push a low-iso film to astronomical heights, or a medium sensitive (400) film in dark situations because:<br>

- The film, at it's nominal rating, will not be able to see see any real highlights, mostly mid-tones and shadows.<br>

- When you expose a 100 ISO film at a 1600 ISO film, you effectively put a pair of welders-goggles on your camera, your film will "see" very very little during exposure, unless it is very sensitive.<br>

- During development, the highlights is the thing that moves up the zone scale (usually from zone 5-6 and up), the rest of the zones stays put, in the case of dark scenes, they go black, no matter what you do.<br>

So basically, if it's dark, you better use a film that can actually "see" that scene the way you want it.<br>

This means that if a scene is dark, you need a high sensitivity film to be able to "see" what you after after, then expose accordingly, or else, you are left with mid-tones and shadows and you'll end up with thin negatives and a bad day in the darkroom.<br>

The TMax 100 @1600 - 3200 claim is a shot done directly into the SUN, the reflections in the scene holds so much power that even with "goggles" you will still have highlights to work with, thus the push works, somewhat because it's not a dark scene at all.<br>

The shadows are blocked though and the tonal scale is compressed, because all zones below 5 is basically black.<br>

I'd like to see the poster shoot his TMax 100 at a dimly lit party at 3200 and try and get something useful out of it (not just blank negatives, because in my mind, they will be so thin that they will be effectively blank).<br>

Pushing, effectively, is a mute cause with film, either you are lucky to retain something above zone 5 when you expose, or you are shooting a scene that has enough light to begin with.<br>

<br />Since Fuji has discontinued Neopan 1600, IMO the only viable option for low-light photography, is to actually use digital these days, no film can compete with cameras that operate normally at ISO 6400, 12800 and even higher.<br>

Push film for effect, not to save the day (IMO)</p>