Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 57,945   Posts: 1,194,823   Online: 628
      
Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Burnaby, BC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    198

    Suggestions on shooting/processing "existing light" black and white?

    In early August I am heading to Louisiana and Mississippi to spend a month shooting a mixture of architecture, landscape, documentary and street work (multi-format, of course). For most of my color work - both 35mm and 2 1/4 - I have decided on a mix (depending upon subject matter) of E100G and E100VS. Given that Ektachrome P800/1600 is no longer available, I have opted to use digital for any "existing light" color work I shoot. For black and white work, during normal daylight hours, I have opted for FP4 for 2 1/4 shooting and either HP5 or Tri-X for 35mm. My question concerns "existing light" (i.e. late pm) shooting. The options I am looking at are: HP5 or Tri-X "pushed," or one of Delta 3200 or T-Max 3200. Has anyone here done comparison tests with these four films? Do any of these films give more consistent results than others? I expect to be working with a variety of light sources if that bears on the issue.

  2. #2
    chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fort Wayne, Indiana
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    660
    Delta 3200 and Tmax 3200 give a lot better tonality than pushed 400 speed films. I've used both extensively at 3200 and 1600 and both the Delta and Tmax are good films. I like the Delta 3200 slightly more than Tmax 3200, but if you can only get Tmax, its good too.


    Tmax 3200 at 1600



    Tmax 3200 at 1600



    Delta 3200 at 1600



    Delta 3200 at 1600



    Delta 3200 at 3200



    Delta 3200 at 3200

    All of these examples were developed in Tmax Developer, which is the best developer I have found for either of the 3200 films.
    Chris Crawford
    Fine Art Photography of Indiana and other places no one else photographs.

    http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

    My Tested Developing Times with the films and developers I use

    Become a fan of my work on Facebook

    Fort Wayne, Indiana

  3. #3
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,624
    Quote Originally Posted by BradleyK View Post
    Has anyone here done comparison tests with these four films?
    They have been extensively tested. The "3200" films provide about a stop more shadow detail.
    Curves for TMax 400 followed by P3200 (From the Kodak website*):



    (*I won't be surprised if not long from now I'll be indicating "Historical information from the internet..." when referring to Kodak products.)
    Last edited by ic-racer; 01-07-2012 at 02:44 PM.

  4. #4
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,624
    I thought these films were great when they came out. However, even back in the 1980s, it seems every roll I got was already fogged pretty bad, and I was not certain I was getting my extra full stop worth of performance.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Burnaby, BC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    198
    Nice work with both films, Chris. Given that another respondent mentioned potential (?) fogging issues, I will test both emulsions ahead of time. I buy all my film from B&H in NYC, so the fogging concern - depending upon the treatment by customs - may or not be a concern; but it is something that will influence my choice. Thanks to all who took time to respond.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR INFRASTRUCTURE:


 
                     

Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin