LOL As development of fast films has probably ceased, what other colour film would you suggest for low light.............If you set Kodak 800asa to 1600 asa would it be better?
Originally Posted by mawz
And the end result is what is important, something is always better than nothing and an extra stop (assuming fuji is a true 1600 asa film and not really a 800asa film) is always handy.
BTW I disagree with you about awful grain, of course there is nothing worse than an underexposed fast film neg, but using the film with flash and there is no annoying grain on my 5X7" prints and would like to show a pic, but people in the pic would be recognised on the net, and don't think it proper I do so.
Just found the times for pushing XP2, I was using 8 mins @ 38°C in C41 developer for 1600 EI, I'd cut that for 800 EI to around 5½ - 6 minutes.
Originally Posted by pentaxuser
I never used the Delta 3200 but did try Tmax 3200 & the Fuji 1600 but never liked them. I have Delta 3200 in my camera at the moment and used it in Athens to shoot some hand-held night shots over Christmas. You know where that roll came from as you were there too
I use HP5+ at 1600, processed in Ilfotec HC, 1:31; or Delta 3200 at 3200 or 6400, processed in DD-X.
Apart from processing it yourself, it may be possible to get Ilford's processing service to push it.
Originally Posted by pentaxuser
EDIT: Actually, their order form has a tick box for it: http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/...4152130548.pdf
"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.
Thanks Ian. Can I take it that this was rotary processing? My guess is that trying to expose different frames at different EIs but using the push times for 1600 is probably self defeating in the sense that any benefit in a lower speed in terms of say better shadow detail is negated by what will turn out to be over contrasty negs at the lower speed? Or does it in fact work this way as it would in a trad B&W film? Ilford seems to suggest that anything from 50 to 800 is possible on the same film with standard 3mins 15 secs processing and this is a 4 stop range. So it prompts me to wonder whether using a 1600 push time wouldn't deliver better negs in those exposed at 400 where light conditions allowed as well as good negs at 1600. This would only be a two stop range.
Originally Posted by Ian Grant
Have you tried this on the same roll or was your experience confined to exposing the full roll at the same 1600 speed.If it was the latter, what's your verdict on how much you lost in terms of a good neg compared to exposing at 400 or 200?
I think I can safely take it that your verdict is that XP2+ pushed to 1600 wins over TMax 3200 or Fuji 1600. Are you able to describe the benefits compared to Fuji 1600 or TMax 3200?
I'll have to wait until you have developed the D3200 to get your verdict on how it compares to pushed XP2+.
I always think of processing at 38C as being a little more critical in terms of getting the temp correct than processing at 20C but it may be that XP2+ is slightly less critical than colour neg and push times means that timing to the the exact second is less critical.
Another consideration in its favour is that XP2+ is available in bulk roll with all its advantages compared to single rolls of D3200.
Many thanks for taking the trouble to answer these questions.
A good day was the Ilford tour with fine companions in the group.
Steve. I wonder if the push processing refers to XP2+ as well as trad B&W films. I might e-mail Ilford on this.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I always shot complete rolls when push processing and usually a few per session. I use inversion agitation for all film processing, and never had a problem with C41 or E6 at 38°C it's relatively easy to keep the temperature stable.
To me the tones & grain of XP2 pushed were preferable to the Kodak 3200 & Fuji 1600 films,but I was using XP1/2 well before these fast films were launched so it was also a case of sticking with what I knew. I'll try & finish the Delta 3200 in the next day or so if the rains stop !!!
I would bring along a roll of Tmax 3200 (or Delta 3200) and a roll of 400 iso film. if the show is at a small club go with the Tmax 3200 and change the ISO around for what you need, it has great latitude and can be easily pushed or pulled. if the show is at a major venue you can go with the 400, assuming you can get close enough to not need to pull out canon's ef 1200mm....
erm from the majority of postings, it looks like 35mm film cameras, without a tripod, are relegated to B/W for low light and then muck around with chemicals and a developing tank, what next? err well then scan the neg or print in a dark room.......Even the world's best salesman would have a job to convince Joe public on that one.....................hey I've a great idea for low light pics colour or b/w, why not get a DSLR with IS like the D700....(many a true word said in jest as I'm still a film user)
Last edited by Excalibur2; 01-06-2009 at 08:51 AM. Click to view previous post history.
In most venues I use a tripod but not for still images only HD video, you need to be using a hand held stills camera for flexibility and it's the one time I prefer zoom lenses, they have to be fast with a maximum aperture of f2.8. I bought a Vivitar S1 70-210 early on and now use Tamron SP's on a Canon. Because I work directly for the bands record company I never need back-stage passes or permission to shoot/film etc and the venues know me anyway, but normally tripods aren't allowed, and often no video or SLR cameras.
It's always important to take far more film than you plan to use as you never know what might happen. I shot a concert back in the 80's where Robert Plant was joined by an unannounced special guest Jimmy Page, Jason Bonham (john's son) was on drums and they let rip into a Medley of Led Zep numbers. Because I had spare film I managed t5o get some great images, I'd already shot 6 previous bands.
My 2 cents.
For B&W I like Fuji Neopan 1600 or Ilford Delta 3200. NP 1600 is my favorite B&W film, period, so I usually use Delta 3200 only for medium format, which I don't tend to use for shows. I shoot both as rated. It may be sacrilege here, but I don't develop my own film. I've had no problems w/local pro labs (now lab, singular) developing B&W here in DC or other major "photo" cities (NYC, London, Miami), but can't speak to the situation in Raleigh (NC?). Based on my experience, I assume they use Ilfotec, T-Max, or X-tol developers @ the standard times.
For color, I would agree w/Excalbur2 that if you want color output, digital is clearly superior, but if you want to wear the hairshirt:
C41: Fuji Pro 800Z @ 640 (but developed normal) or 1000 or 1250 (but pushed 1 stop) or Natura 1600 @ 1000 or 1250 (but developed normal). Natura 1600 is only sold in stores in Japan, but can be bought on the web via eBay or Japan Exposures. I think it's better than Super 1600 (finer grain, better color), but it may not be worth the expense for you.
E6: Fuji Provia 400X pushed 1 or 2 stops, but per 2F/2F's warning in his post, it is a daylight film &, being a slide film, doesn't have multi-layered technology of Pro 800Z or Natura, so will be very, very red/yellow in your typical incandescent/halogen type lighting. If the club lighting is heavy on the stupid red gels (see below), forget it, unless you convert to B&W in post (which it does well, BTW).
I wouldn't rule out flash, for fill, etc., if you know how to properly use it, as it may be your best option given the crappy lighting in most small venues, particularly if the club has a propensity for red gels, as most seem to do (red plays havoc w/both film & digital sensors).
Last edited by furcafe; 01-07-2009 at 11:09 AM. Click to view previous post history.
"Unequalled in the quality and scope of its lenses . . . the performance of its shutter . . . the perfection of its film system . . . the adaptability contributed by its interchangeable backs . . . the efficiency of its coupled range finder . . . the convenience and precision of its variable-power view finder, the Ektra can produce finer results, throughout a wider range, than any other existing camera."
--Eastman Kodak prospectus
for Ektra, 1940
My Flickr stream