Request Advice on B&W Film for City Night Photography

[david_s4]

I'd like to take some 35mm B&W street photographs of the city at

night, to include buildings, lights, sky and passers-by. I'm flexible

on speed, but think 400+ would let me capture people (even if they

motion-blur a bit). What film would you recommend to minimize grain,

maximize latitude, and provide nice smooth tones in the middle? I

don't know much about developing (usually shoot color transparency),

but am open to trying it if the recipe isn't too complicated.

[25asa]

The shots Ive done in the past I used TMAX 400 with decent results. The washed out highlights that film tends to have get reduced shooting at night. But I've gone over to Tri-X from TMAX. Im not sure how much the grain has been reduced on the new version of Tri-X, but some have said its better. If you don't want to use Kodak, my next choice then would be Delta 400 or HP5+.

[25asa]

Man! It took me 15 minutes just to post this response. Photo.nets server is down again. Anyways here is a pic I took on TMAX 400 at night. Not the best scan, but will give you an idea.

 

http://www.photo.net/photo/1224857&size=lg

[titrisol]

Fuji NeoPan 1600 would be my 1st choice, fine grain and true 1600 speed.

 

Delta 3200 would be choice #2

[lex_jenkins]

This question is almost too open-ended to answer...

 

Have you seen a style of photography or a particular photographer that you'd like to try to emulate?

 

For example, Brassaï did his entire Paris by night series during the 1930s using film that couldn't have been faster than the equivalent to ISO 100 today (probably slower). He almost certainly used a tripod and occasionally accepted some motion blur from moving subjects.

 

Since it sounds like you're not set up to process your own b&w film, a C-41 process monochrome film like Ilford XP2+ or Kodak's equivalent might be the best way to start.

 

Beyond that, there are dozens, possibly hundreds of approaches to b&w night photography in terms of materials, exposure, processing, etc.

[everheul]

One thing you should consider is reciprocity. Tri-x requires much more compensation than t-max: For example TMY metered at 60 seconds, comes to about 5 minutes while Tri-x is something like 30 min or so.

 

The last night city scape I shot with TMY and developed in HC110 filution F for 20 minuted at 70 feg with 30 sec agitation, followed by ahitation every 5 minutes thereafter. My prints came out quite nice, even up to 16x20 but I was using 4x5, so I'm not sure if results in 35mm would pass in the grain department.

 

To capture people, I might use TMZ or Delta 3200. This type of shooting will tend to accentuate grain no mater what you do.

 

Hopefully Les will chime in. He seems to be the resident push processing and compensating development guru.

 

My flatbead scanner crapped out, so I'll try to put up an example if I can get the scanner working.

[kaiyen]

I would still call myself a beginner, but some examples:

 

<a href="http://www.pbase.com/romosoho/stanford_at_nightbw">Tri-X @ EI 400 in D76</a>

 

<a href="http://www.pbase.com/romosoho/san_francisco_at_night">FP4+ @ EI 100 in ID-11</a> (obviously I mean the b&w pictures)

 

<a href="http://www.pbase.com/romosoho/jess_and_andy_10182003&page=all">Delta 3200 @ 3200 in Microphen</a> (you should be able to tell which ones are the 3200. note-I didn't dev long enough, so contrast isn't great).

 

I like night photography.

allan

[dean_williams]

If you are wanting to hand-hold (that assumes you have a fast lens) then I would second the Fuji 1600. Although it processes well up to 1600, I don't think of it as a true 1600 film, but it works well enough at that speed using Fuji's suggested times. On the other hand, if you are using a tripod, pick what ever film you like. Tri-X is a truly forgiving film, and if 400 is fast enough (plenty of street lights?) it will do a great job and it may be easier to get, depending on where you live. Wait for Lex's reply and see what he suggests, too. He's a low light pusher kind of guy.

 

Dean

[everheul]

OOPS, sorry. I see les wrote while I was in the middle of writing my response. Since I cant scan tonight, I found the only immage I have already in the computer of an existing light, night, B/W 35mm shot. This was scanned right from the negative a year ago. The last time I tried a post like this it looked bad even though the prints looked good but here it goes.

 

When you "push" you simply bring up the contrast...note the total lack of shadow detail.

 

Data: Tri-x pushed to 3200 (I had no TMZ or delta 3200 in my bag so I used what I had) 4 or 5 second exposure @ f1.8 via candle-light, at forbes island in san fran (it's a moving barge). No tripod, camera set on a wine glass for stability...yes they posed.

 

Processed in X-tol 1:3 per kodak data sheet (ran out of acufine)<div></div>

[lex_jenkins]

Sorry if my previous answer seemed short and not terribly helpful, David. I think I surprised some folks with that answer.

 

There are many options for the b&w shooter. But unless you're doing your own processing or have access to a very competent lab (and money to pay), traditional b&w isn't the best route. You'll get indifferent processing and prints from most labs, leaving you to wonder what all the fuss is about traditional b&w photography.

 

Stick with the XP2+ or Kodak equivalent for now.

[chris_waller]

If you're not set up to process your own film then, as Lex suggested, XP2 is your safest bet. But it's relatively simple and inexpensive to set up to process b+w film (changing bag, tank, reels, thermometer etc) and then you could try Tri-X (TX400) and you have the option of pushing that a stop or two.

[oskar_ojala]

If you process yourself (which is good considering what you want to do), my choice would be Tmax 100. It has fine grain, reasonalby good reciprocity and good highlight handling (I like its look for night shots, but not much else.)

 

Speed depends a bit on aperture, f1.4 is quite a bit brighter than f8, so with a fast lens you can control the blur to a reasonable speed. If you want to handhold, then get fast film, a prime lens and a camera that's easy to handhold.

[discpad]

I agree with Oskar: Use a nice bright lens -- I use a 55mm Nikkor f/1.2. Even if you stop down to, say, f/2.8 or f/4, it's a LOT easier to focus.

 

Cheers!

Dan

[david_s4]

Thanks for the great answers so far. My fastest lens is a 35/2 and I do own a tripod, so I'm hoping to get by without stepping up to 1600 or 3200. I assume that local brightness will dictate whether I can capture people with 100 or 400, but I'll give it a try.

<p>

I do have access to a decent local lab that develops B&W, but: 1) their prices seem rather high, and 2) I wouldn't know what to tell them to do. So I may start with Lex's C41 recommendation. Any opinions on the relative merits between XP2, BW400CN or Neopan 400CN would be welcome (I'll probably scour the archives too). Do these films look as good as more traditional B&W film of comparable speed?

<p>

As for shooting style, I don't think I have one, but the <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo.tcl?photo_id=700179">Rue Becquerel</a> PoW is about what I have in mind. I'm fond of Brassai's Paris at Night work, though I suppose most folks interested in night photography are. If you want to follow-up, the <a href="http://photography.about.com/library/weekly/aa040901a.htm">Eye of Paris</a> is a decent article, and the <a href="http://www.masters-of-photography.com/B/brassai/brassai_backstage_full.html">Masters of Photography</a> has a nice selection of images.

[25asa]

Yes I remember seeing that night shot. Its a good one. It helps when there is lighting in the area to brighten things up. When shooting the shot you have set up, take the same one 2 or 3 times at different times- sort of like bracketting. Dont forget reciprocity errors in your exposures. I used to take the shot at normal exposure, then over. With long exposures its easy to fudge timing since an extra second or two doesnt usually hurt the exposure much. But these were all 30 to 50 second shots on a tripod. You may have something else in mind. When you're comfortable with C41 based films, do try traditional B&W to see if you prefer that look. Sometimes the grainier look of real B&W gives the shot more character.

[jorge_oliveira2]

David

 

If that's the kind of photos you are looking for, I would not push films and use a tripod.

 

I look for more dramatic night scenes (deep shadows), so I push TriX and like the results - but they do not look like the ones you want.

[kaiyen]

<p>Wow. I just realized I once again failed to click the "html" option when posting...

 

<p><a href="http://www.pbase.com/romosoho/stanford_at_nightbw">Tri-X @ EI 400 in D76</a>

 

<p><a href="http://www.pbase.com/romosoho/san_francisco_at_night">FP4+ @ EI 100 in ID-11</a> (obviously I mean the b&w pictures)

 

<p><a href="http://www.pbase.com/romosoho/jess_and_andy_10182003&page=all">Delta 3200 @ 3200 in Microphen</a> (you should be able to tell which ones are the 3200. note-I didn't dev long enough, so contrast isn't great).

[discpad]

Alan, <br><br>

<b>

What the hell <a href = "http://www.pbase.com/image/25115848" target = "_blank">happened to Macy's?!</a></b>

[kaiyen]

Dan,

It was actually quite amazing. We had an earthquake the exact instant I took the picture, but, amazingly, the ground only rose and swelled at the edges of my lens' FOV. The spot where my tripod was wasn't affected at all. It looks just like the effect of a fisheye, but was in fact a massive 9.0 earthquake that left no damage and was not reported (due to the overwhelming coverage of the Scott Peterson case and prescient knowledge of the gay-wedding controversy).

 

Crazy, eh? :-)

 

That was my first trip out with my fisheye, and was having fun. I actually like the effect, and rather than seeing it as an alternative to a super-wide-angle, I use it as providing an entirely differnet perspective on things, equally worthwhile as a super-wide.

 

allan

[lex_jenkins]

David, it sounds like you've done at least some homework and have a good idea of how you want your own photos to look. Can't ask for a better start than that. I think you're a good candidate for DIY b&w processing.

 

Beware the addiction, tho'.

[janne1]

I use TMX100 when i can use longer exposures, and otherwise, tmy pushed or Delta3200