advertisement


Favourite films and developer

topoxforddoc

pfm Member
Following on from Gaius’ (Mark’s) thread on what camera, how about what film? No point on carping about film stock, which masquerades like the proverbial Norwegian Blue. That’s no good to Gaius. If we were to do that, my first up would be Kodachrome 64 - I have some left, but it’ll end up in a museum.

Suggestions which Gaius can do at home please.

So first up for me - my fave, HP5 in XTOL 1:1 as I shoot mostly in available light. Would like to have mentioned Fuji Neopan 400, but that’s circling the plughole right now.

OK, maybe for Gaius and his Elinchroms, some Ilford FP4, Kodak Plus X or Fuji Acros 100

Colour stock - I don’t shoot any more, now that kodachrome has gone.

Who’s up next?
 
Fuji Neopan 400 (if you can find it, now that it has been discontinued)

XTOL

I also quite like Rodinal, although it's not as smooth to use as XTOL
 
You have no idea how much I am enjoying this and learning along the way from the like minded.

Back in the day i liked Ilford paper as a rule, if i wanted it harder like a line print or very grainy, Kodak was always the the best at that.

Agfa a little softer but real nice with a sepia tone.

Bob Carlos Clarke used Agfa and he was the poster boy for them along with being a fine photographer.

I literally don't know what is good today.
 
You have no idea how much I am enjoying this and learning along the way from the like minded.

Back in the day i liked Ilford paper as a rule, if i wanted it harder like a line print or very grainy, Kodak was always the the best at that.

Agfa a little softer but real nice with a sepia tone.

Bob Carlos Clarke used Agfa and he was the poster boy for them along with being a fine photographer.

I literally have no idea what is good today.

Mark,

Paper and paper developers is a whole new thread. You could go on forever about that. Agfa Record Rapid and Brovira were great back then.

Charlie
 
You have no idea how much I am enjoying this and learning along the way from the like minded.

Back in the day i liked Ilford paper as a rule, if i wanted it harder like a line print or very grainy, Kodak was always the the best at that.

Agfa a little softer but real nice with a sepia tone.

Bob Carlos Clarke used Agfa and he was the poster boy for them along with being a fine photographer.

I literally don't know what is good today.

Sorry but I must disagree. At the time there were several kinds of paper by each of the manufacturers you mention. As for Kodak being harder than Ilford, each came in various grades (1,2,3,4, less commonly 0 and 5).
Today I find that whenever I find a paper that works for me and get used to it, after a while it disappears from the market.
 
I like FP4, in Rodinal 1:75, with agitation only once every 2 or 3 minutes, or for portraits in D76/ID-11 which is a bit smoother. Haven't tried X-tol yet.

My favourit B&W film was Tri-X, particularly the 320 ASA version that came in 6x6 and bigger formats. But I don't think it is available any more (shit!!!).

I don't like HP5 at all, looks muddy and depressing. But some people love it so maybe I'm doing something wrong. Any ideas?
 
Sorry but I must disagree. At the time there were several kinds of paper by each of the manufacturers you mention. As for Kodak being harder than Ilford, each came in various grades (1,2,3,4, less commonly 0 and 5).
Today I find that whenever I find a paper that works for me and get used to it, after a while it disappears from the market.

Yes I know, several grades by each manufacturer, mentioned. I was speaking quite generally and I used to run a wet dark room for a pro studio. :)

Kodak F4 was well hard!
 
I like FP4, in Rodinal 1:75, with agitation only once every 2 or 3 minutes, or for portraits in D76/ID-11 which is a bit smoother. Haven't tried X-tol yet.

My favourit B&W film was Tri-X, particularly the 320 ASA version that came in 6x6 and bigger formats. But I don't think it is available any more (shit!!!).

I don't like HP5 at all, looks muddy and depressing. But some people love it so maybe I'm doing something wrong. Any ideas?

HP 5 is good when pushed in the tank if you are after a high grain effect.
 
I like FP4, in Rodinal 1:75, with agitation only once every 2 or 3 minutes, or for portraits in D76/ID-11 which is a bit smoother. Haven't tried X-tol yet.

My favourit B&W film was Tri-X, particularly the 320 ASA version that came in 6x6 and bigger formats. But I don't think it is available any more (shit!!!).

I don't like HP5 at all, looks muddy and depressing. But some people love it so maybe I'm doing something wrong. Any ideas?

you can still get Tri-X 400

http://www.silverprint.co.uk/ProductByGroup.asp?PrGrp=2241
 
Kodak HIE, Ilford FP4 developed fast in "strong" Rodinal. Reduced the halation of the HIE to manageable proportions, and gave me scannable negs from both. Longer times with more dilution if I wanted things a bit "harder" in the print making days, but it was all very hard work.
Did some cyanotypes with a friend recently, which brought back some of the magic.
 
Tri-X in D76 1+1 for 135. Also nice in LC29.


For 120 FP4+, HP5+ and Tri-x in D76 or Xtol.

I shoot mostly Leica 35 Cron and Hasselblad 80 + 60 mm.
 
How's the 60mm on the hasselblad? I wanted to get away from the 80mm, and so have the 50 and 100 (as well). The 100 is really lovely, the 50 is ok, but nothing special (it's the older one).
 
I've not shot film for the best part of 10 years, but if I was putting another roll in my M6 it would be Tri-X, and it would be developed in Xtol diluted 1:3.
 
Before digital, I routinely used Delta 100 and 400 in dilute ID11.

But after attending a workshop given by the late Barry Thornton, I tried a homebrewed compensating developer based on his modernised Stoekler recipe. I stuck with it, as it was an economical brew and after some experimentation, I could produce negs to suit my enlarger with good shadow detail and highlights that never blew out.

No doubt, I could have achieved the same results by experimenting with other developers, but could never summon up the enthusiasm to do so.
 


advertisement


Back
Top