Efke for portraits

[lance_warren]

Has anyone used 35mm Efke film for portraits? I've read lots about

the "different look and feel" of the results, but haven't found any

actual examples of it being used in portraiture. (Several sites

frequently suggested in some of these threads have examples of

landscapes, but it's hard to imagine that with people - indoors).

Any thoughts - or, better yet, actual photos - would be quite

appreciated. Thanks!

[lex_jenkins]

I haven't used my Efke R100 yet for portraiture but I'm confident it will be fine for that purpose based on my tests so far. Beautiful tonal range.

 

Here's a thread on the B&W Photo - Film & Processing forum with an image attachment demonstrating Efke R100. The image file is attached via a link, not visible on the thread itself, and you'll have to scroll down a bit to find it.

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005yOZ

[lance_warren]

Lex,

 

Thanks a lot -- I checked out the image and, though it's not a portrait, feel convinced it would do a great job with human subjects due to the truly remarkable tonality you were able show. So, how about another question? :)

 

I tend to use Ilford Delta 100 and am perfectly pleased with the results, but should I consider trying a roll of Efke? How might my results change? I'll have a week-long trip in October during which I'll do a roll of portraiture and I really want it to be good. How should all these thoughts figure in with that?

 

(oh and obviously I'm eager to hear anyone's thoughts on these, btw, not just Lex's...)

[silent1]

<i>I tend to use Ilford Delta 100 and am perfectly pleased with the results, but should I consider trying a roll of Efke? How might my results change? I'll have a week-long trip in October during which I'll do a roll of portraiture and I really want it to be good. How should all these thoughts figure in with that?</i><p>

 

If you're only going to shoot one roll of portraits on your trip, do it with a familiar film. Images you care about and can't reshoot are not the place to experiment. If you have time before the trip to obtain and test the Efke, that's another kettle of fish, but if you won't have time to shoot, develop, and possibly reshoot and develop again to find out how Efke reacts to your particular methods, you're better to stick with the Ilford for your portraits.<p>

 

Of course, nothing prevents you from taking along a roll of the Efke and shooting it on other subjects...

[lex_jenkins]

I'd agree with Donald about using a familiar film for important subjects such as family or vacation photos.

 

However I don't think you'd be disappointed with Efke 100 used the same way as you'd use Delta 100. You may not see much difference, tho', depending on how it's processed.

 

I processed my roll, per the sample shown in that link, in Tetenal Neofin Blau, a Beutler type developer. These developers are known for high apparent sharpness and excellent tonality, along with some increase to grain (tho' less so, as far as I can see, than Rodinal).

[lance_warren]

Donald and Lex,

 

That sounds like very sensible advice indeed. I suppose I shouldn't be looking for a way to produce quality artwork AND trying to take a shortcut to finding a quality tool by rushing my decision, anyway...those things just don't mix.

 

But whenever I do get around to trying a roll or two of Efke, what sort of directions should I pass along to the lab? I don't do my own developing, but I have a B&W lab that does excellent work, so that shouldn't be a problem. I only ask because, if it truly is as 'different' as others have proported (ie - with the high silver content and other special features) then maybe the lab will need to do something befitting its uniqueness. Thanks guys...

 

--Lance

[lex_jenkins]

If you send film out for processing I don't know what advice I could offer. In my experience labs tend to do indifferent b&w work so I do my own. If you're getting good results with the film you've been using I'd suggest sticking with it. Hate to be so cynical but I just don't have good experience with labs.

[25asa]

For the lab I would just ask them if they know the developing time for this film, as theirs a chance they may have never seen it before. I have to do this with a lab I use here as the import films that are oddball they have never developed before. I just wrote the times down on a piece of paper given with the films when I sent it to them. Just make sure you ask what developer they are using. I know 3 labs in the city that use Xtol, HC-110, and T-Max.

[lance_warren]

Thank you to everyone who has offered thoughts on me and my Efke quest. I recently decided to concede to rationality and use Delta 100, but...

 

on second thought...

 

The portraiture I'll be doing will most likely be with the aid of tungsten (normal household lightbulb) light - specifically the sort of light Efke is reportedly designed to be used with. I've read on multiple sites that it was initially formulated for use in 1930's photo studios (where light sources of that type were quite prevalent) in order to render the photos in a natural, non-reddish/orangeish light. Of course, I could use my trusty Delta 100 and adjust this later in Photoshop, but that doesn't feel quite as authentic or artistic.

 

So, two questions: first, is there anything wrong with my logic? And second, how should I have it developed? I have seen SO many contradictory suggestions about how to develop Efke film (both in threads on this site, the J&C Photo site, the 'unblinkingeye' page, etc) that I'm nervous about using it. If we can get some consensus as to what I should direct my lab to do, that'd be awesome :)

 

Thanks!

 

--Lance

[kymtman]

I just received my six rolls of efke 25 asa from a place in ohio. $3 a roll. Has anyone used this speed? Can this film be developed in Microdol-x? Questions came up as to where to buy this film, I got mine at http://www.frugalphotographer.com/cat08.htm

Can't wait to use it .. portraiture ... I'll post results I think this ultra fine grain would best be used in landscapes etc. and not for portraits, but we will soon see.

[sue_deva]

I shot some 35mm portraits using Efke 25 and the results were excellent. I used an indoor setup with two 500-watt spots and one 500-watt fill. Deep, rich blacks and good shadow detail without anything getting blown out in the light neutrals. I'm usually a diehard Delta 100 fan, but Efke worked pretty well on that occasion and provided super-fine-grained enlargements.

[rich815]

Rafil, could you elaborate a little on why you liked it in terms of how it compared or was better than Delta 100? I guess I'm asking if you are going to sacrifice 2 stops what benefit makes up for that with Efke 25 vs. Delta 100? Or is it just a different "look and feel"? Thanks.

[sue_deva]

Richard,

 

I usually wouldn�t want to give up two stops. However, this was a controlled lighting situation (with a good amount of light, at that), so I managed to squeak by with a 1/30th and a decent aperture; even then, yes, Efke was a little impractical. Under most conditions, I would use Delta 100. It�s either that or etherizing your subject in order to get him/her to be still enough at 1�, or shooting landscapes if you�re not into etherizing people. The principal benefit of Efke 25 seemed to be a tremendous exposure latitude. Even some fairly deep blacks retained shadow detail, whereas highlights on the subject�s cheek (about five or eight feet from a 500-watt spot) showed good tone and detail. A few days earlier I had shot a similar set-up with Delta 100 and I noticed that the Delta negatives were slightly flatter (which is unusual). At least for THAT particular situation. Who knows why. I was rating both films at their nominal speed and using accurate metering with consistent readings. The Efke�s super-fine grain was nice, too, but I rarely have grain problems printing Delta 100 almost-full-frame on 8x10 paper. (In that sense, it�s more of a �Wow!� thing that you can only appreciate close up rather than something that makes a difference from any realistic viewing distance.) I would scan some of the negatives or prints and put them up, but I am in India right now (and until next August) so I can�t� if you�re really curious I can do it when I have access to a scanner. (FYI� I have 10 rolls of Delta 100-120 in my bag. No Efke.) However, the Efke was developed in D-76 and the Delta 100 was developed in Rodinal, and neither one for the exact recommended time, so it�s not a completely fair evaluation. When it comes down to it, there are too many variables for me to say conclusively what was good about the Efke VERSUS Delta, though the negs and the prints were nice and contrasty without losing highlights or shadow detail. So we�ll just chalk it up to �look and feel.� But a nice look and feel. Also, and I don�t know how to describe this exactly, but there is something �soft� (and pleasing) about the look of the prints from the Efke negatives.