Why not just buy the precut 4x5 [3.9x 4 something or other] stuff and save the hassle?
Originally Posted by Mike Wilde
Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson
Yes, but it will produce also more fog and more grain.
But as said, it's trial and error.
The Rollei Ortho is available in 120 and produces more contrasty results than traditional film:
If you want low grain, high contrast, and cheap, in 120 and 4x5, definitely go for either Efke 25, ADOX ORT 25 or Arista APHS. The ADOX is much cheaper than the Rollei.
Ortho films can build up contrast until they're bulletproof, and grain just does not exist.
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
push any low ISO film a couple stops and you can get high contrast
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
"Make good art!"
- Neil Gaiman
"...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera".
- Yousuf Karsh
"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit".
What kind of contrast do you mean? Edge contrast (which has to do with the perception of sharpness or what I would call "bite")... or overall separation of shadow blacks and highlight whites?
For the latter, you can control it very well just by multigrade printing and split grade and so forth. As long as you don't blow your exposure then you have, in principle, many contrast possibilities in the print phase.
Now, if it is edge contrast that you desire, that is a different issue that has more to do with the particular film choice- traditional or t-/delta-grained and so forth. To me, fp4+ and hp5+ have a characteristic edge bite that I like for most subjects. There's no pushing etc. to get that look, that kind of edge contrast is an inherent part of the film's personality.
I really don't subscribe to the philosophy of pushing a film to boost contrast. I know firsthand that it technically can work in some cases, but... pushing leads you into coupled variables e.g. contrast and grain and response to subject brightness range. I personally don't like coupled variables. What if I want smooth grain but also a contrasty tone scale? What about a grainy image but low contrast? Pushing isn't the way to do either of those. I'll take my variables decoupled, thank you very much.
Look, you can take a totally smooth and well exposed acros or tmax neg and print it on multigrade papers such that you'll have high contrast and smooth grain. Or you can lith print that acros neg, I did that recently and posted it. The contrast in the print looks absolutely nothing like what you'd expect from acros or a t- or delta-grained film. The unexpected is possible: you can have grainy shadows and delicate smooth highlights. Whatever.
The bottom line is that a properly exposed neg on just about any b&w print film gives you lots of print possibilities.
P.S. an example of a 'smooth' film that has a particular contrast look that I like very much: agfa scala. That is a very smooth slide film, there's no hint of grain at typical enlargements, and yet the contrast is quite a recognizable feature. Because it's a slide film, though, so do you usually wind up making an internegative on paper of film.