Switch to English Language Passer en langue franįaise Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,212   Posts: 1,532,069   Online: 1219
      
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 39
  1. #1
    ted_smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    uk
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    396
    Images
    1

    Ilford FP4 125 - What am I doing wrong? Why are my prints consitantly bad?

    What do I keep doing wrong?

    Ilford FP4 125 - I used it once back in 2008 using my (then) Nikon F80 and it's built-in on-camera flash - I shot two rolls of it. The result were very flat with very few shades of anything near black - they were just washed out looking grey prints. I figured it was most likely me and my built in flash and lack of understanding about B&W film.

    The rolls I had left from then have been in my fridge ever since (though still within their use by date, just), unused, as I've been too scared to use it since, despite learning lots since. Still, I had a need the other day and I know my photographic style and kit has improved since then too so I gave it a second try during a day out with friends. So, this time, I shot another roll of it using my Nikon F5 and SB-800 speedlight.

    I was using aperture priority and centre-weighted metering with 75% metering concentrated within the circular area of the viewfinder which was always placed around the chest of the subjects. No compensation was used - it was outdoors and sunny with variable shades. Based on questions I've asked previously, I always tend to rate my films at less than their box speeds - typically 50% less, so if it's ISO100 I'll rate at EI50, or thereabouts. With this 125 film, I rated it at EI80 to try and ensure I got a denser negative than previously. My SB-800 was set at -1 power using TTL mode (not TTL-BL as I was only interested in the face or main subject) and the flash mode was SLOW+REAR so it just acted as fill in flash.

    Sent the film off to the lab and back came my prints looking fairly poor again! Nothing like the results I've had with Acros & Neopan.

    What on Earth am I doing wrong? Everything you read about this film tells me it's the best thing ever, yet I just fail with it every time - I don't have the same problems with Fuji Acros, Neopan, or any of the Fuji brands. Why does this Ilford FP4 125 keep taking my legs away?! It must be something I am doing wrong.

    Picture here :







    Ted
    Ted Smith Photography
    Hasselblad 501CM...my 2nd love.

  2. #2
    Barry S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    DC Metro
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,250
    Images
    31
    "Sent the film off to the lab and..." <---------- That's your problem right there.

    You can't count on a lab to 1) develop conventional b&w film correctly or 2) print b&w negs decently. It looks like your negatives may be good--at least they have plenty of shadow detail, so a good printer could probably produce *much* nicer prints.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Eastern Kansas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    278
    Images
    1
    Could it be the lab? I don't know about labs in your area, but here in the US it is hard to find a lab that does good B&W work.

    Dave

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Plymouth. UK.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,400
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by ted_smith View Post
    What do I keep doing wrong?

    Ilford FP4 125 - I used it once back in 2008 using my (then) Nikon F80 and it's built-in on-camera flash - I shot two rolls of it. The result were very flat with very few shades of anything near black - they were just washed out looking grey prints. I figured it was most likely me and my built in flash and lack of understanding about B&W film.

    The rolls I had left from then have been in my fridge ever since (though still within their use by date, just), unused, as I've been too scared to use it since, despite learning lots since. Still, I had a need the other day and I know my photographic style and kit has improved since then too so I gave it a second try during a day out with friends. So, this time, I shot another roll of it using my Nikon F5 and SB-800 speedlight.

    I was using aperture priority and centre-weighted metering with 75% metering concentrated within the circular area of the viewfinder which was always placed around the chest of the subjects. No compensation was used - it was outdoors and sunny with variable shades. Based on questions I've asked previously, I always tend to rate my films at less than their box speeds - typically 50% less, so if it's ISO100 I'll rate at EI50, or thereabouts. With this 125 film, I rated it at EI80 to try and ensure I got a denser negative than previously. My SB-800 was set at -1 power using TTL mode (not TTL-BL as I was only interested in the face or main subject) and the flash mode was SLOW+REAR so it just acted as fill in flash.

    Sent the film off to the lab and back came my prints looking fairly poor again! Nothing like the results I've had with Acros & Neopan.

    What on Earth am I doing wrong? Everything you read about this film tells me it's the best thing ever, yet I just fail with it every time - I don't have the same problems with Fuji Acros, Neopan, or any of the Fuji brands. Why does this Ilford FP4 125 keep taking my legs away?! It must be something I am doing wrong.

    Ted
    It looks a bit over exposed to me. Try it at box speed first before making any light-meter adjustments or run a test to establish the optimum ISO rating for your camera.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Karlskrona, Sweden
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    47
    Hi Ted

    First off I donīt think your prints look bad at all, great graytones but sure an overall low contrast. But when you send it of to a lab it is hard to say where in the process it has gone "wrong". If you rate your film at half the iso speed and just send the film off the guys at the lab probably process it at itīs normal speed. Further on when they actually do the prints its up to the machine to interpret your negs and do something with them, that is mostly a lottery game unless the lab is truly professional and do every print by hand and you can tell them how you want your prints. I donīt think that is the case as it is very rare (and expensive).

    As a comparison, I have the past years sent a few rolls of Kodaks BW400CN to labs and have always been extremely disappointed in the results. This has always been because the lab has done a crappy job and their machines could not handle the negs in a proper way.

    Obviously the best thing to would be to develop and print yourself but I imagine that you donīt want/can do it so Iīll leave that. The first thing I would try is to shoot the film at itīs standard speed. But unless you can talk to the labīs staff and ask them to make the prints with more contrast or to develop the film longer (more contrast in the negs) its probably not much that can be done from your part. I donīt think you are doing anything wrong when you shoot, the problem lies in development and printing I suspect.

  6. #6
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,056
    Quote Originally Posted by Keith Tapscott. View Post
    It looks a bit over exposed to me. Try it at box speed first before making any light-meter adjustments or run a test to establish the optimum ISO rating for your camera.
    I agree. Shoot box speed. Blindly reducing the film speed when you are not doing the developing is not a way to go. Reduce that film speed when you control the developing and printing and you have a real reason to do so. The overexposing possibly reduced the overall contrast.

    Steve
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  7. #7
    David Brown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    near Dallas, TX USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,278
    Images
    5
    It is impossible for us on a forum to tell what is "wrong" (if, indeed, anything is wrong) from these scans. I can tell you that I (as well as many, many others) could likely take those negatives and print them at several different contrast grades and/or light to dark ranges.

    According to your account, the variable here is the FP4, as opposed to other films. Films are different. FP4 is a good film, but if your lab does not do a good job on it, and likewise does do a good job with the Fuji films, then use the Fuji films. I know you don't want to "waste" the film, but would you rather waste the shots and the processing costs?

    I also agree with using box speed. Box speed in a camera such as you describe, with anything near normal development, should give a printable negative.
    David
    Taking pictures is easy. Making photographs is hard.

    http://www.behance.net/silverdarkroom
    http://silverdarkroom.wordpress.com

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Switzerland
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    376
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    28
    Many labs use colour paper to print B&W nowadays, it's cheaper to use with their C-41 minilab. I can't tell by the scans you posted, but maybe it's a good idea to make sure these are true black and white paper.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    376

    FP4 prob

    I had similar difficulties, gave up on the lab. They can fould up a ball bearing, not to mention scratching film etc. I would suggest you first develop it yourself, not a too big problem, with daylight tanks. Once you know how to get good negatives, then take it to the lab to print, and if they don't give good results, either make em do it over or switch labs. There are some pro labs like Dalmation that are good, don't know the $$.
    Second possibility- develop the film yourself, get a cheap scanner or have it scanned on a flatbed, then print digitally.

    B/w is fun but it requires a long learning curve, IMHO.:

  10. #10
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,056
    Home development in a daylight tank is easy. One can load the tank using a changing bag.

    Steve
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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