Re: Favourite B&W Films.
Nicholas O. Lindan
> What is your favourite B&W Camera film for general use and what is it
> that you like about it?
Depends on the format:
35mm TechPan/Technidol Gives a MF/LF format look while having 35mm
system flexibility in lenses, finders,
viewpoints...
TMX/Microdol-X Very low grain, unfortunately no LF look
120&4x5 TMX/D-76 Low grain, D-76 gives a bit more detail
in the shadows than M-X
8x10: TMY/D-76 Extra grain not much of a concern
extra speed is nice
--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters
http://www.darkroomautomation.com/da-main.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com
Jean-David Beyer
> What is your favourite B&W Camera film for general use and what is it
> that you like about it?
>
in Xtol developer 1+1.
N.B.: many photographers do not like a straight H/D curve because there is
_no_ margin for underexposure.
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 18:25:01 up 45 days, 10:16, 3 users, load average: 4.14, 4.51, 5.06
Michael
<Keith.Tapscott..3f8a9b8@photobanter.com> said:
>
> What is your favourite B&W Camera film for general use and what is it
> that you like about it?
Tri-X. It is fast enough, a little bit grainy but not too grainy. For
35mm it has the photojournalist look, in MF the grain is negligible and
it is just a great all around film.
--
Michael
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
> On 2009-03-07 16:45:50 -0500, Keith Tapscott.
> Tri-X. It is fast enough, a little bit grainy but not too grainy. For
> 35mm it has the photojournalist look, in MF the grain is negligible and
> it is just a great all around film.
I would agree with that.
My favorite landscape film was Adox KB14, and the recent modern
incarnations I have heard are similar on better stock.
The whole Panatomic-X, Plus-X, Tri-X and the ASA 1200 film (2745/2475
Recording film, whatever it was called) all had a good "look" IMHO and
each had it's use. Personally, I think that Plus-X would have been a
better choice for last man standing, but I think it an Tri-X are both
still available somewhere.
T-Max is IMHO one of those films that if you understand its limitations and
process it properly can produce wonderful photographs and if you don't
will cause you much grief. With the right developer and proper exposure,
T-Max 100 is a worthy replacement for Panatomic-X.
My choice for favorite film developer is hands down, no contest Edwal-FG7,
with a second for Rodinal. They are very different formulas, with very different
results, but if you are the least bit careful, it's difficult to get a
unusable negative with either.
It may, depending upon your definition of good, be hard to get a good one
with Rodinal, but it won't leave you with a black or blank film.
Just a little wandering off topic, my favorite color fim was Ektar 25,
and I hope to try the new Ektar this summer. Although it was color, it produced
negatives with the grain and contrast that I looked for in Black and White
film and would have no complaints if it was the last film made. Unfortunately,
it's been gone for what, 20 years now?
I'm also hoping to get my hands on some Lucky film. I was able to find
a few rolls of their color film, which I have not shot, but would love
to try their black and white film. I understand the older stuff (and maybe
current production) does not have an anti-halation coating and produces
some interesting results with highlights.
Geoff.
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel g...@mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM
Lawrence Akutagawa
bad, but I personally like Pan F, of which I still have a number of 50 foot
rolls in the freezer. The Agfapan 25 and Rodinal combo also was very, very
nice...but I have long ago run out of Agfapan 25.
Michael
> The whole Panatomic-X, Plus-X, Tri-X and the ASA 1200 film (2745/2475
> Recording film, whatever it was called) all had a good "look" IMHO and
> each had it's use. Personally, I think that Plus-X would have been a
> better choice for last man standing, but I think it an Tri-X are both
> still available somewhere.
Yes,, Plus X and Tri X are quite available, in 35mm, 120 and 220.
>
--
Michael
Charles Hohenstein
Michael <adunc...@mypacks.net> wrote:
Unfortunately, I don't believe Plus-X is available in 220 anymore. Tri-X
320 is the only 220 black and white film in current production, if I am
not mistaken. I wish that it were otherwise.
--
Charles Hohenstein (to reply, remove Gene Robinson)
"The sad huddle of affluent bedwetters, thumbsuckers,
treehuggers, social climbers, homophiles, quavery ladies,
and chronic petition signers that makes up the current
Episcopal Church . . ." -‹Thomas Lipscomb
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
> Unfortunately, I don't believe Plus-X is available in 220 anymore. Tri-X
> 320 is the only 220 black and white film in current production, if I am
> not mistaken. I wish that it were otherwise.
IMHO if that is the last film available, while I would prefer something else,
it's not a bad choice. We could be stuck with Verchrome Pan, or even worse
that chromogenic film with the orange base.
Michael
> Charles Hohenstein wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately, I don't believe Plus-X is available in 220 anymore. Tri-X
>> 320 is the only 220 black and white film in current production, if I am
>> not mistaken. I wish that it were otherwise.
>
> IMHO if that is the last film available, while I would prefer something else,
> it's not a bad choice. We could be stuck with Verchrome Pan, or even worse
> that chromogenic film with the orange base.
>
> Geoff.
This may be correct. B&H in the US lists Plus X and both Tri X's in 120
but only the TriX 320 in 220. Plenty of the chromogenic crap but only
in 120. That's sad because I only get 10 exposures on a 120 roll with
my Pentax 6x7.
--
Michael
erie patsellis
freezer has been pretty well stocked lately, good thing too, as there's a dearth of decent
short dated film on ebay these days.
erie patsellis
Toni Nikkanen
By the way, why is it that there's currently only one B&W film in 220 while
plenty of colour film is available in that format?
Charles Hohenstein
Toni Nikkanen <to...@morgoth.tuug.fi> wrote:
> By the way, why is it that there's currently only one B&W film in 220 while
> plenty of colour film is available in that format?
Because Ilford's machine for finishing 220 film is in disrepair, and
they don't believe that the 220 market justifies the necessary
investment in getting it repaired. So I've been switching from Ilford
films back to Kodak. I have no idea why Fuji won't offer at least one
black and white film in 220.
--
Charles Hohenstein (to reply, remove Gene Robinson)
"The sad huddle of affluent bedwetters, thumbsuckers,
treehuggers, social climbers, homophiles, quavery ladies,
and chronic petition signers that makes up the current
Episcopal Church . . ." ---Thomas Lipscomb
Frank Pittel
: Charles Hohenstein wrote:
: > Unfortunately, I don't believe Plus-X is available in 220 anymore. Tri-X
: > 320 is the only 220 black and white film in current production, if I am
: > not mistaken. I wish that it were otherwise.
: IMHO if that is the last film available, while I would prefer something else,
: it's not a bad choice. We could be stuck with Verchrome Pan, or even worse
: that chromogenic film with the orange base.
: Geoff.
I'm kind of fond of Efke-25.
--
-------------------
Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
Rebecca Ore
Frank Pittel <f...@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote:
> Geoffrey S. Mendelson <g...@mendelson.com> wrote:
> : Charles Hohenstein wrote:
>
> : > Unfortunately, I don't believe Plus-X is available in 220 anymore. Tri-X
> : > 320 is the only 220 black and white film in current production, if I am
> : > not mistaken. I wish that it were otherwise.
>
> : IMHO if that is the last film available, while I would prefer something
> : else,
> : it's not a bad choice. We could be stuck with Verchrome Pan, or even worse
> : that chromogenic film with the orange base.
>
> : Geoff.
>
>
> I'm kind of fond of Efke-25.
Acros 100 for me, please, not that Tri-X isn't also useful.
David Starr
Efke in 4x5
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Retired Shop Rat: 14,647 days in a GM plant.
Speak softly and carry a loaded .45
Lifetime member; Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
Web Site: www.destarr.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Michael
My only experience with efke is with 127, because when I first got my
used yashica 44 there was no 127 available (other than from film for
classics) except the Efke. That was a good film.
--
Michael
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
> My only experience with efke is with 127, because when I first got my
> used yashica 44 there was no 127 available (other than from film for
> classics) except the Efke. That was a good film.
Back when the Leica was new, a company called ADOX made a film called
KB-14, which was designed for landscape photography with the new
miniture film cameras. KB is German for movie film and 14 was it's DIN speed
by the 1960's when I first got it.
It had fine grain, long tonal range, and little red response being
a cross between the old othrochromatic and new fangled panchomatic film.
Over the years it's been made by in Germany by the original plant, but
sold under the name ORWO, and later by EFKE (I think in Yugoslavia).
The name has been changed by the current manufacturer to KB-25 as it is
no longer DIN 14, it's ISO 25 (same speed different name). The biggest
difference between it and the original film is that the old film was
mounted on a base that was so thing it could have been used for
cling wrap in a kitchen, and it was slightly gray.
I have not seen the new stuff (donations gladly accepted), but I hear it
has a clear(er) thicker base.
It produced wonderful results developed in Edwal FG-7, but was/is one of
the films that could do ok with Rodinal, if you diluted it enough (1:50?)
Last I had heard, EFKE signed an exclusive distrubution deal in the US
(possibly North America) with Freestyle, which caused some bad blood with
someone who was collecting orders to buy a production run. B&H also sells
it, but they get theirs from Freestyle, not EFKE directly.
So far EFKE seems to be small enough that they can produce an order that
Kodak will not even look at. I think that is the future of film.
David Nebenzahl
> So far EFKE seems to be small enough that they can produce an order that
> Kodak will not even look at. I think that is the future of film.
I agree; at least I hope that's the case. The giants will abandon film
sooner or later (meaning consumer film like we're discussing here;
they'll probably always make the speciality stuff used for various
industrial processes). So it will be up to smaller companies to make it
something of a boutique industry. Fine with me, so long as the film is
still available.
--
Made From Pears: Pretty good chance that the product is at least
mostly pears.
Made With Pears: Pretty good chance that pears will be detectable in
the product.
Contains Pears: One pear seed per multiple tons of product.
(with apologies to Dorothy L. Sayers)
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
>
> I agree; at least I hope that's the case. The giants will abandon film
> sooner or later (meaning consumer film like we're discussing here;
> they'll probably always make the speciality stuff used for various
> industrial processes).
Eventually those industrial processes will be replaced with nonphotographic
ones.
> So it will be up to smaller companies to make it
> something of a boutique industry. Fine with me, so long as the film is
> still available.
IMHO it will be better. There will be less film made and less variety, but
the companies that do make it won't be worried about selling their product
at Wal-Mart.
Craig Schroeder
negatives almost print themselves as the skin tones have a great
gradation (almost 3-D effect), shadow detail is good while highlights
don't blow out or need manipulation.
Craig Schroeder
craig nospam craigschroeder com
Chemiker
<chohensteG...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>In article <rlphc21...@morgoth.tuug.fi>,
> Toni Nikkanen <to...@morgoth.tuug.fi> wrote:
>
>> By the way, why is it that there's currently only one B&W film in 220 while
>> plenty of colour film is available in that format?
>
>Because Ilford's machine for finishing 220 film is in disrepair, and
>they don't believe that the 220 market justifies the necessary
>investment in getting it repaired. So I've been switching from Ilford
>films back to Kodak. I have no idea why Fuji won't offer at least one
>black and white film in 220.
FWIW: B/W photolabs are an endangered species. I live between
Houston and Beaumont, and to get simple B/W roll film done, even
35mm, it has to be sent out of state. Forget 120/220. And if you
do 4x5, take out a home equity loan. And buy a calendar.
I'm lucky. Im my town there is a photoshop that actually DOES
120/220 and digitizes also. 4x5, tho, is still a "send it to Beijing"
thing.
Alex, Cambo 4x5, shooting 6x9 off Schneider 210mm 5.6.
Peter
> On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:40:27 -0400, Charles Hohenstein
>
> >In article <rlphc21yd1y....@morgoth.tuug.fi>,
> > Toni Nikkanen <t...@morgoth.tuug.fi> wrote:
>
> >> By the way, why is it that there's currently only one B&W film in 220 while
> >> plenty of colour film is available in that format?
>
> >Because Ilford's machine for finishing 220 film is in disrepair, and
> >they don't believe that the 220 market justifies the necessary
> >investment in getting it repaired. So I've been switching from Ilford
> >films back to Kodak. I have no idea why Fuji won't offer at least one
> >black and white film in 220.
>
> FWIW: B/W photolabs are an endangered species. I live between
> Houston and Beaumont, and to get simple B/W roll film done, even
> 35mm, it has to be sent out of state. Forget 120/220. And if you
> do 4x5, take out a home equity loan. And buy a calendar.
>
> I'm lucky. Im my town there is a photoshop that actually DOES
> 120/220 and digitizes also. 4x5, tho, is still a "send it to Beijing"
> thing.
>
> Alex, Cambo 4x5, shooting 6x9 off Schneider 210mm 5.6.
The resources necessary to process B&W negatives in 120, 35mm or 4x5
are modest. The resources to make wet prints (and especially
projection prints) are where home labs must become more elaborate.