DSLRUsers.com

Ive wanted to shoot mono for a while now, what film do people recommend?

Ive heard good things about Kodaks Tri-X 400 film - gritty and dirty grain

I wouldnt mind playing with Fuji's Neopan 1600 B&W, has push capabilities to EI4800! (sounds like at that rating it would support handholding in low light indoors...) seems not too easy to get.

I did at one stage roll my own film, bought 100" from the states cant remember what specific it was though... processed it in a B&W darkroom... got pretty good results... will post a few eventually.

JD

I've used Agfa almost exclusively for my B&W stuff for years. I think it has a nicer contrast range than anything from Kojak or Ilford.

Standard prodessing in ID11, though.

Ilford Delta 100 for me processed via ID-11.

Someone has cought the film bug recently

I'll usually stick to Agfa 100, but I play with infrared black & white film too, including the Macro IR 820c and the wannabe infrared film Ilford SFX 200.

Great timing with this new section . Lately I've been thinking of taking some high ISO B&W film shots in low light. What film would you recommend?

Agfapan 100 was my favourite, although Plus-x was OK and Tri-X was good for low light stuff.

However, my developing tank has retired, and has bought a unit on the gold coast.

Greg,

Leigh and I too on the AP100.

Greg B wrote:However, my developing tank has retired, and has bought a unit on the gold coast.

With the price they fetch these days, that's hardly surprising.

My recollection is that a bulk loader and a developing tank each used to cost sub-$20. Can you believe that today you're lucky to get any change from around $70 for either item?

IDII still costs about the same as a packet of gum though.

currenlty my studies requires me to start off using ilford 100(35mm and 120) and 400 (35mm)delta.
pretty easy to use and devolep.

They required us to use the same stuff at Uni when we first started redline... I personally didn't like the 100 much and preferred Agfa's 100, but the Ilford Delta 400 wasn't bad.

i haven't seen much difference between the 100 and the 400 in terms of grain but it has a nice contrast and 3 mintues less developing time with rodinal 21C

I take it tha most of the rolls of film are not your standard C41?? Process type from the local Kodak shop.

So the question is where do you get such rolls developed? and what sort of costs are involved for a 24 exp film?Turn around times?

MATT

MATT wrote:I take it tha most of the rolls of film are not your standard C41?? Process type from the local Kodak shop.

So the question is where do you get such rolls developed? and what sort of costs are involved for a 24 exp film?Turn around times?

MATT

B&W is usually not a C41 process. I prefer to do it myself.

You can get C41 black and white, however you often find that it's not as rich or vibrant as your regularly processed one.

That's a result of the film, not the development.

MATT wrote:So the question is where do you get such rolls developed? and what sort of costs are involved for a 24 exp film?Turn around times?

I develop at home. It probably costs something like a dollar for the chemicals and an hour or less to develop the roll (+overnight to dry). Making prints takes a lot more effort to get the end result, but I guess thats the point of using B&W film.

ah yes, the film i bought in bulk and handrolled was delta 400.

JD

I suppose that a compromise approach would be to use BW film, develop it at home (which I know is relatively easy but you still need to muck around with chemicals and black bags and temperatures etc) then scan in the negs (which I can do courtesy of my Epson Photo 3170)

Hi Greg,

how much did the Epson 3170 set you back ?
How good ist is on colour negatives and colour slides ?

Cheers and happy Easter
CD

kodack tmz 3200 has spectacular grain and contrast.

CD, sorry, missed your post last week, just spotted it now.....

The 3170 was $530 or so I think (and at the time they also had a $50 cash back deal which made me very happy!!)

Ihaven't scanned colour negs, but I am very happy with the performance on slides - and the results should be exactly the same.

You have a good deal of control on dpi etc, and obviously the higher you go, the better the scan (and the bigger the file). If you select generous dpi and output to an uncompressed tif or bmp, the results are extremely high quality.

Favourite combo was TRI-X at EV 320 souped in HC-110 at dil 1:7

Annabell Williams, one of the Uk's leading wedding photographers swears by Fuji's Neopan 1600. Bought her book on wedding photography and portraiture, seems to be the only B&W film she uses.

JD

kodack tmz 3200 has spectacular grain and contrast.

Shot this recently on my new F100 and 50/1.8... am loving it!!

JD