Recommendation needed - 'best' B&W roll film/developer combo :-)

[Helinophoto]

Fuji Acros or TMax for ISO 100 would be your best bet for sure.

They are indeed the "'best" concerning grain and resolution of all the 100 ISO films. :P

Don't use Rodinal if you want smaller grain is my second tip, my experience with Acros is that it is very low-grain in most normal developers I've tested it in so far (Tmax dev, Tetenal Ultrafin, HC-110).

If you can get hold of Efke/Adox 25 ISO, it will probably be the cleanest no-grain film possible (except microfilm) but I would think that grain rarely is a problem in 120 with Delta, FP4, Acros and TMax.

[jp498]

Acros or Tmax 100 are what I know to be super fine grain. I'd expect delta100 would be in the same league as it's similar technology. You may like pyrocatHD for a developer, as the staining action makes the grain less prominent in some situations. If you are making 40" prints and bothered by the grain, perhaps you should move to 4x5" or bigger film.

[StoneNYC]

Dear Stone,

PAN F + is a 'traditional' film, I have seen references to 'hybrid' films, no such film exists.... T.Max / DELTA Professional etc are CCG controlled crystal growth films.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology LImited :

Cool thanks! Anything better than Ilfsol 3 that I should be using with my Pan F+?

Also, has ilford ever thought of creating their own version of Kodak's technical pan? Or buying the patent? The reason I ask is because its touted as the best and most missed B&W film. It's like the Kodachrome of B&W. As I recall it also wasn't fully B&W where in certain developers would also cause some slight blue (and perhaps magenta?) tones where there was heavy concentration of that color. As well as its super fine grain.

To be completely honest I have a few rolls from eBay, but honestly haven't used them yet, mostly because I want the images to be something worth shooting and developing with the unique color cast it deserves to have for such a good film. It would seem to me that it would be something that would benefit the B&W photographer and would sell well?


~Stone

The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Slixtiesix]

Concerning technical film, this stuff is also said to be amazing, but I have no personal experience with it:

http://www.adox.de/english/ADOX%20Fi...CMS_Films.html

[nworth]

You are asking for fine grain in a 20X enlargement (I assume from the square format that you are coming from 2-1/4 square negatives). Although such enlargements are usually viewed at a distance that makes the grain of something like Tri-X unnoticeable, your post suggests that such grain is undesirable to you. That leaves only the very fine grain films. Pan-F is probably the most available, and it works well in a variety of developers. Xtol would be the first that comes to mind. There are other very fine grain films available that may deserve attention, such as Adox CMS II, but they may be hard to find. They may also require special developers.

From your post, I assume you are using ink jet printing (which is a quite different thing than carbon printing). The digital process can do a great deal to hide the graininess in a print, so it might be worthwhile to try a large print with your existing film and see how it looks. The Delta films have quite fine grain if developed properly in the recommended developer.

[tkamiya]

Sounds like the easiest and most practical thing to do is to pick up Tmax-100, Delta-100, and Pan-F+, process it in XTOL or something and see if one of them meets your needs. Personally, I have not noticed much difference (or if any at all) using different developers for a given film but my experience is small.

Anything beyond these, you may run into supply problems in short order.

Otherwise, you may just have to go "bigger".... LF in your future?

[spijker]

If scanning is the main objective then you may also want to consider C41 films. Ilford XP2 scanned very good in my 35mm film scanner and at EI100 it is very fine grained. Scanning regular BW films in my Nikon Coolscan IV-ED gave more grain. Plus you can't use ICE on regular BW films. Don't know if this all applies to drum scanners as well.

Nice shot of Old Montreal.

[kerrpanda]

Can't contribute much to your question, as I'm still working out my stock of Agfapan +Rodinal. But that's a gorgeous image!!!

[ROL]

I've offered you some experience and examples on your previous thread, which you seem to have abandoned. But to be fair, they were only analog based and not hybrid.

[fatso]

Wow, thanks everyone for all the feeback - what a great forum ! The two images in my post are recent trials with Efke 25 and Rodinol (1:50). I quickly scanned them on an old Epson flatbed but haven't looked at them with a loop yet, but I really like the tonality - on another thread I was told either Rodinol or a Pyro with Efke 25. Will Pyro make that much of a difference ?

I'm surprised no one mentioned any other iso 25 films, how does their grain compare to 100 speed t-grain films like Delta/TMAX ?

It's not going to get much finer grained than TMAX 100/Delta 100 in Xtol. That's your best bet. To be honest, Delta 100/D-76 isn't too far behind. I'd stick with it... Great work by the way!!

I had always assumed tmax and delta were the same, I'll add it to my list of combinations And thanks !

Hi fatso:

By the way are you from Montreal?

Michael

I never had any luck with XTOL with Delta 100- my negatives were always severely overdeveloped, and I'm very careful with process temps, shutter speed calibration, dilution ratios... maybe I just had a bad batch of xtol - will give it another try.

And yes - from Montreal

I can't imagine finer medium format combination than a tabular grain 100 speed film.

We haven't been offered a tabular grain 50 speed or 25 speed film so I don't know how you can do much better.

I'd experiment at least a bit with same film but 4x5 or 8x10 see if that is more satisfying.

Otherwise take some of the fine suggestions here.

Your example shows adequate shadow detail without evidence that you rated the film at half speed. But I want to point out that for the finest results, I believe you need to absolutely give the minimum exposure that provides shadow detail (instead of the safer "half box speed" technique that guarantees results but with potential for overexposure... which would mean more grain).

Hi Bill, your suggestion sounds interesting, how do I determine proper exposure ? Should I measure and expose for a different zone than 18% gray ?

As for 4x5, unless type 55 film becomes available again, I just don't have the patience !

And the answer is... Diafine. Or a similar two-bath developer. I could list the reasons why this is the "magic bullet" but no less an authority than Sandy King has already done so in View Camera magazine, the article which you can find here.

I used Diafine with TMAX 400, flatbed scans and pigment prints. After being back in the darkroom for over a year, I recently pulled these prints out of the file and realized... gulp... they may be the nicest prints I've ever made.

Great article ! My hands are going to be full the next few weeks !!

That is one nice image.

Thanks !

Here's another one from the series

Concerning technical film, this stuff is also said to be amazing, but I have no personal experience with it:

http://www.adox.de/english/ADOX%20Fi...CMS_Films.html

Dying to try it. I used Techpan for large prints developed in Technidol - one of my favorites... it will be missed


Paul