iso1600 film?

Discussion in '35mm Cameras and Accessories' started by winjeel, Jul 16, 2010.

  1. winjeel

    winjeel Member

    Messages:
    92
    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Location:
    central Japa
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I'll be doing some night events using both film and digital. The last time I did a night event I used Fujifilm iso1600 (I forget which type) and wasn't so thrilled with the results. Any suggestions? I'll be working at about F2, 1/125, 50mm handheld, no flash.

    If I do decide to use a flash, (Minolta 5400HS), iso100 should be fine, shouldn't it?

    FYI, here's a sample of what I'll be doing: http://ablyth.photoshelter.com/image/I0000p6M4QAroiwE
     
  2. TSSPro

    TSSPro Member

    Messages:
    229
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Location:
    Carbondale,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    You will be able to expose your subj fine with ISO100 film and flash, but the ambient light will be very limited in what you get get. Some images may look like a person floating on a black background. Try Delta3200. Not color, but it gets you the speed you need and can be pushed well.

    ALl the best.
     
  3. fschifano

    fschifano Member

    Messages:
    3,216
    Joined:
    May 12, 2003
    Location:
    Valley Strea
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Question is what is it about the fast film that you don't like? Using a slow with flash will not help. All you'll get are subjects in a black hole.
     
  4. totalmotard

    totalmotard Member

    Messages:
    95
    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    Location:
    St. Louis, M
    Shooter:
    35mm
    The fastest film I've shot in color is Fuji 800 press. If you use a flash with it you'll get close to what you want. That will give you some ambient light at least. But the flash needs to be TTL to balance fill. It won't look as good as that photo though, that was probably shot digital @ 3200 iso or better.
     
  5. winjeel

    winjeel Member

    Messages:
    92
    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Location:
    central Japa
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Thanks. That photo is mine, at iso1600 (on digital). What I'm hoping for this year is smoother, less grain, and less noise... but going black and white film and making it intentionally grainy is the other way to go :wink: Much prefer grain than noise anyway.
     
  6. pentaxuser

    pentaxuser Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,228
    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Location:
    Daventry, No
    Shooter:
    35mm
    If we are talking colour neg only then the Fuji 1600 is the fastest I know of but it can be quite grainy even at 10x8 inches print size. At least one person here on APUG believes that the Fuji Pro 800 can be pushed to 1600 with less grain and just as good colour balance than the 1600. He/they may respond.

    If you want to try B&W and an EI of 1600 is sufficient then Fuji Neopan might fit the bill. From what I have read D3200's true speed is inherently faster than Fuji 1600( neither has a true box speed as stated) but that's not to say that Fuji won't look as good at 1600 as D3200 downrated to 1600.

    You may prefer the look of Fuji Neopan 1600. I suspect that as you are in Japan you will certainly prefer its price compared to imported D3200 :D:

    pentaxuser
     
  7. totalmotard

    totalmotard Member

    Messages:
    95
    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    Location:
    St. Louis, M
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Here's a shot with Neopan 1600. I like the look and feel. It's kind of smooth and grainy at the same time:
    [​IMG]
     
  8. holmburgers

    holmburgers Member

    Messages:
    4,423
    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Location:
    Rochester NY
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
  9. fotch

    fotch Member

    Messages:
    4,824
    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2005
    Location:
    SE WI- USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    totalmotard, that is a good example. Makes me want to try it out. If I may ask, what developer did you use?
     
  10. totalmotard

    totalmotard Member

    Messages:
    95
    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    Location:
    St. Louis, M
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Thanks, I used a local camera store called Creve Coeur Camera. $6 to develop, $3 to put on disk. I'm not ready to do my own developing yet. Here's another with a bit more light:

    [​IMG]
     
  11. pentaxuser

    pentaxuser Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,228
    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Location:
    Daventry, No
    Shooter:
    35mm
    This is not intended as a crticism of you but if these are both an accurate scan of the prints then while the first shot is a reasonable advert for Fuji Neopan 1600 B&W, the second as a potential user of this film would give me cause for concern about the featureless highlights on her face and chest. The woodwork in the background is similar but less important.

    It may be my monitor or your scanner but on the original print does her forehead exhibit this patchiness which almost makes her forehead look as if it has a birthmark where the skin lacks pigment. If she does have such a mark then I apologise for drawing attention to it but at least it relieves the film of the blame as it were.

    I don't know how to put it more delicately while still asking the question

    pentaxuser
     
  12. lns

    lns Member

    Messages:
    434
    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2006
    Location:
    Illinois
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I get good results pushing Tri-X to 800 or 1600 in either X-Tol or Ilford DD-X developer.

    Fuji makes a beautiful 800 speed color film called Pro 800Z, but I believe it may be discontinued.

    -Laura
     
  13. totalmotard

    totalmotard Member

    Messages:
    95
    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    Location:
    St. Louis, M
    Shooter:
    35mm
    pentaxuser,

    In the original there's a bit of hair running down her forehead right where the shadow starts. It's making the transition look a little strange. That scan is from the lab. I'll scan it myself and see there's any improvement in the highlights.
     
  14. 2F/2F

    2F/2F Member

    Messages:
    8,003
    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2008
    Location:
    Los Angeles,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I was about to suggest the same film, but I don't agree with any of the other technical advice.

    1. On-camera flash will never give you the same look as ambient light in such a situation. Not even "close." The only way to get close with flash would be to have flashes on stands in the same general location of the lamps providing the ambient light, and to modify the fixtures in such a way that the quality and color of light is similar to these lamps.
    2. The flash does not need to be TTL metering to balance itself with ambient light. This is a rather bold statement that really could not be much farther from the truth. You will get far better results balancing the two with 100 percent manual exposure (ambient and flash).

    I would also look for remaining stock of Fujicolor Pro 800Z. It has the same speed as the Superia 800, but softer grain and more saturation. In 35mm, I usually opt for the Superia, but the Pro 800Z is (or was) a very amazing film. It will certainly give you something closer to the results you get from a digital camera shot at high ISO, like the one you posted
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 16, 2010
  15. Athiril

    Athiril Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,962
    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2009
    Location:
    Melbourne, V
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    +1 for Tri-X for B&W, pushed Tri-X imho will beat down Delta 3200, I use Rodinal with, works extremely well, keeps grain nice and fine when done right (only a little agitation+gentle).

    Pro 800/Z is still around, plenty of it, though I look for my film in 120.

    You may want to see if you can order from this site - http://translate.google.com.au/tran...n&u=http://www.film09.com/shop/main/index.php

    They dont list all their stuff they sell on ebay, they have some very good deals just on their site

    Ultramax 800
    Portra 800
    Superia 1600

    XTRA 800 can be found on ebay in 35mm
     
  16. winjeel

    winjeel Member

    Messages:
    92
    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Location:
    central Japa
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Thanks. I think I have enough suggestions to keep me busy all that night. :smile:
     
  17. fschifano

    fschifano Member

    Messages:
    3,216
    Joined:
    May 12, 2003
    Location:
    Valley Strea
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    You can easily get 1600 from Tri-X developed in Diafine, especially if you use a bit of bounced fill flash. If you're going to go with B&W this is a good combo, but the trick is to use a diffused fill flash, preferably off camera. You don't need TTL flash to do this as some would have you believe. All you need is a auto thyristor unit with a translucent dome on it. You don't need a lot of flash, just enough to fill in the deep shadows.
     
  18. jimmyp

    jimmyp Member

    Messages:
    20
    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    los gatos, c
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    I'm with holmburgers. Use a slower speed. Use 1/60 or 1/30. Those drum sticks will show some dynamic motion and you can get away with some 400 speed film.
     
  19. winjeel

    winjeel Member

    Messages:
    92
    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Location:
    central Japa
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Arrrr now that you put it that way... :tongue: One more week then I can try it at a small festival, and then another week, and try it at a larger one... now I'm more eager than before.
     
  20. djacobox372

    djacobox372 Member

    Messages:
    127
    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Along with the other recommendations, make sure you're using the fastest lens you can.
     
  21. winjeel

    winjeel Member

    Messages:
    92
    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Location:
    central Japa
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Minolta 50mm 1.4 should do the job. :smile:
     
  22. E76

    E76 Member

    Messages:
    373
    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Location:
    Rochester, N
    Shooter:
    Instant Films
    As an avid user of Neopnan 1600, I can assure you that the film does not look that bad when developed and exposed properly. I use Diafine and expose at 2400 and it looks great! Highlights are not blown out and it does have that "smooth-yet-grainy" look totalmotard describes. It is a bit contrasty, however, as I often have to print the negs at grade 1 or even 0.
     
  23. chris00nj

    chris00nj Member

    Messages:
    47
    Joined:
    May 29, 2008
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Both Superia 1600 and Neopan 1600 are good possibilities. Here are some examples.

    Superia 1600:
    [​IMG]

    Neopan 1600:
    [​IMG]
     
  24. totalmotard

    totalmotard Member

    Messages:
    95
    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    Location:
    St. Louis, M
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Okay, I went back and rescanned and the highlights were fine. I underexposed a bunch of the shots and the lab compensated for them, leaving the properly exposed shots overexposed. Here is the rescanned version:

    [​IMG]

    I even took out the hair that was bothering pentaxuser. :smile: