Try mixing it 1:50 from the concentrate and adding 50% to your B times, so 6min, becomes 9min, etc.
Originally Posted by rafal
That's just, like, my opinion, man...
I've been using T-Max 100 & 400 with T-Max developer since I started doing photography seriously. So it's basically what I know. I've recently started experimenting with Ilford Delta 100 & 400, FP4, HP5 developed in D-76. I've shot a few rolls of each so far. Not enough to tell what I like yet. I'll be doing more.
Kodak Tri-X 400 and Ilford FP4. I develop it all in Pyrocat-MC.
Sometimes I use something different, like Delta 3200 for speed, or just try something new to shake it up a little bit. But I always come back to those two it seems.
"Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank
"Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman
"...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh
I shoot a multitude of different film types & most of them I wouldn't claim to know in depth.
However I do a lot of low light photography & the one combination that I use a lot & know very well is Fuji Neopan 1600 rated at 1600 & dev'd in Diafine. Beautiful results with shadow detail, nice tonal range & sharp grain. I'm doing 5 to 10 rolls a week of this. Just wish they made it in 120.
My suggestion would be to find someone whose work you admire and whose technique you would like to emulate. Then find out what they use and try it. I think you can drive yourself nuts with different film/developer combinations. Even as the film market shrinks, the number of combinations must be nearly unlimited.
Think of it like dating. You don't want to date everyone, you just want to find a good match for you. It takes some time to tell if it is a good match, so pick a film and get to know it very well. If after you have put in the effort you aren't happy, then move on to another film
I started with Tri-X and HC-110. Why? Because that is what Ansel used, and if it was good enough for Ansel.... I followed Fred Picker's advice to pick one film and one developer and stick with it until you really get to know how they respond and how you can make that combination work for you. I still use Tri-x in 35mm and 4x5...i.e. for stuff that will be enlarged.
In the last few years, I have moved up to larger formats. I use TMax 400 for 5x7, 8x10 and 7x17 developed in Pyrocat-HD. Why? Because I can 1) use one film for all three sizes, 2) TMax has excellent reciprocity and 3) a very long straight line "curve." This combination works very well for contact printing on Azo. I arrived a this combination after reading every single post on the Azo forum and hearing what others (whose work I admire) used.
I expecially like the fact that I don't have to worry about Quality Control issues with Kodak, Ilford or Fuji films. Yeah, they cost a bit more, but to me they are worth it. YMMV
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
for 35mm black and white I love neopan, in Japan you can get some nicer combinations, but I found the 100iso to be to my liking. What film will depend on the use. I scan mostly (shh) so I have different desires to those printing traditionally.
In colour film I like Fuji Superia negative or Fuji 160 NS I love the amount of highlight tolerance I get, and exposing to get acceptable levels in the shadows the highlights are well dealt with. Until recently I was mainly a fan of slide films (chromes or positives by another name) under the belief that they scanned better. I now no longer feel that way and regard them as being only for projection purposes (where they look gorgeous). I don't have a 4x5 projector (would look wonderful I'm sure) so my chromes are mostly wasted in that respect (though its nice to put one on the light box now n then to sigh).
ADOX makes a nice film too, so perhaps you might want to give that a burle in your camera too (beware, it scratches easily if you're processing your own)
: you understand why it should work but it doesn't
: it works but you have no idea how
Here theory and practice meet, things don't work and I don't know why
My favorite BW film is Fuji Acros 100. I don't have to adjust for reciprocity when shooting long exposures and it has wonderful tonality both for day and night shots. I use Rodinal when I'm serious and Diafine when I'm lazy (or when my 8 year old daughter wants to do some developing).
If you can't answer a man's argument, all is not lost; you can still call him vile names.
- Elbert Hubbard
I'll be scanning mostly for the time being too! I don't have the room to set up an enlarger and I'm trying to pace myself in terms of darkroom stuff
For a long time it was PAN F if I was using a tripod or HP5+ at EI 200 hand held. I have recently been using Delta 400 (at EI 400) instead of HP5+.
I don't have much experience of Kodak films other than a couple of rolls of Tri-X. I didn't see anything which would make me use it instead of HP5+ but a couple of rolls isn't really enough to judge it with. I may try it again one day.
"People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.
You know, not to be more flippant than I usually am , but I think people make the error to choose their films only on the basis of sharpness and grain. I'm guilty of that as well, and it's just recently that I understood what a characteristic curve meant. In fact, it's as simple to understand as a Photoshop curve, so I wonder why it took me so long...
Originally Posted by jasonjoo
What's important to understand is that some developer will nudge slightly the inherent shape of a film's characteristic curve. XTOL will raise the midtones a bit, whereas HC-110 will raise highlights instead. It's minor, but it's there for some films. In the question of "what developer to use" it's often only the grain/sharpness factors that are considered. In fact, I think it's a terrible omission from Anchell and Troop's Film Developing Cookbook that they give data only about these two factors.
Sharpness and grain matter, but so do curve shape, spectral sensitivity, traditional/t-grain, reciprocity; for colour films: saturation, contrast, palette.
And the most important factor: availability!!
What: In 35mm I use Tri-X and Efke 100 in XTOL 1+1; in 120 I use Rollei Retro 100 in Rodinal 1+50 and just started playing with Plus-X in HC-110. I shoot the occasional Efke 25 roll in 120 as well. In colour, I prefer Kodak films, so I use Portra for negatives (the whole line, depending on usage), and Ektachrome E100G or Kodachrome 64 when I want slides.
Why: 35mm Tri-X and XTOL give me smooth looking negatives that print well into 11x14, and the right "look" (which is probably a combination of characteristic curve and spectral sensitivity among other things). Efke 100 also has a "look" but I use it mainly because I sometimes prefer a slower film for tighter grain pattern, and it's very close to Tri-X. 120 Retro 100 in Rodinal has brilliant highlights, and so does Plus-X in HC-110, which is what I really like in larger formats. As for color films, it's mostly a matter of palette: I especially don't like the greens that Fuji film gives.
Last edited by Michel Hardy-Vallée; 03-11-2008 at 11:32 AM. Click to view previous post history.
Using film since before it was hip.
"One of the most singular characters of the hyposulphites, is the property their solutions possess of dissolving muriate of silver and retaining it in considerable quantity in permanent solution" — Sir John Frederick William Herschel, "On the Hyposulphurous Acid and its Compounds." The Edinburgh Philosophical Journal
, Vol. 1 (8 Jan. 1819): 8-29. p. 11
My APUG Portfolio