Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 73,649   Posts: 1,623,531   Online: 871
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 26 of 26
  1. #21
    viridari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Raleigh, North Carolina [USA]
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    330
    Images
    22
    My first results are in!

    Last thursday night I went to the Black Flower in Raleigh. This is an intimate little joint, very easy to get close to the performers and nobody cares. The lighting is extremely dim, though, and aimed a bit weird (and of course gelled red). The musician brought his own white floor lights pointing up.

    I used a Canon EOS Rebel G with Canon 50mm f/1.8 "nifty fifty" lens. Film was Ilford Delta 3200 shot at EI 3200. I didn't want to process this film in Rodinal, the only developer that I have around right now, so I had the lab do these.

    Yes, I seem to have little hairy intruders on my flatbed scanner. Apologies.

    The Full Series

    Samples:



  2. #22

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    349
    HP5 @ ISO 3200 in whatever push soup you or your processor likes. For color, lately, I've been getting very good results with Kodak Portra 400VC exposed @ ISO 1600 and given normal processing through the neighborhood mini lab. Shot two rolls of Portra and two rolls of Fuji Superia 1600 in the same venue at the same event, processed at the same lab and it was no contest. The Portra made better contrast, better grain, and better color than the Fuji. A long time ago - the 1980s - I had pretty good luck pushing 400 speed E6 Kodak and Fuji products to ISO 800 and 1250 or so. BUT I was hand processing small quantities in one shot chemistry. I tried commercial "push" processing through Kodak and others with indifferent results.

  3. #23
    viridari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Raleigh, North Carolina [USA]
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    330
    Images
    22
    HP5 @ 3200? Wow... That I will have to try. Sounds like quite a push but I do love HP5 (and it is a bit cheaper than the Delta 3200).

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    349
    Just a couple of caveats for HP5 3200.
    Know going in that you will eventually have to develop your own technique and the results will be dramatic.

    In the 1980s I shared a newspaper darkroom with a shooter who pushed hard in FG7 with added sulfite. I was an Acufine junkie in those days. We both routinely shot company provided Tri-X at 1600 and 3200. BUT curiously, neither of us could get useable results from processing the other's film at the high ISOs. Maybe differences in agitation patterns or some other subtle difference in our technique. Thus the caution that you will have to develop you own process.

    I switched to the HP5 when I left the company and started buying my own film because I think the highlights don't block as quickly in extended processing.

    It will give you much more contrast and "grit" than I see in your scans from your Delta 3200. You may or may not like it. Depending on harshness or flatness of the lighting it can get to be very dramatic - all highlight and very deep shadows - or (in flat light) just a grey/black mush. Its an all or nothing proposition.

    As I did more and more of this in the 1990s I came to favor very slow working developers - very dilute (2:1) or worn out D-76 - with long developing times - (20-25 minutes) - and very minimal agitation.

    Try it. If you experiment enough you'll come up with a look you like.

  5. #25
    Stock Dektol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    New York
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    66
    For low light in Black and White Ilford Delta ISO 3200 is great. The grain is big but, for some shots that's not a problem... as you can see buy those great shots above.
    I will NEVER stop developing...

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pasadena
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,745
    A tripod is important if you can get away with using one. I shot some film of Chuck Berry a few years ago performing at night and it was very hard even with ISO 400 and no tripod. Solutions: Fast (bust ghastly expensive) ED glass telephotos and zooms, at least ISO 800 film or better ISO 1600, and a tripod/monopod. Being discrete is necessary today too with everyone paranoid about cameras and copyrights - these are sort of conflicting requirements.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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