Favourite 120 film for landscapes ?

For landscapes I have been most happy with Velvia 100. I accidently pushed a few rolls two stops on my last trip (see it here on flickr), the results were still very acceptable.

Velvia does not do that great for skin tones in my opinion; from all the (color-) films I have tried so far, I liked Fujifilm Fujicolor Pro 400H a lot, colors were spot-on.

If you want a negative film for landscape, you should give Kodak Ektar 100 a try. It's not as rich in color as Velvia, but offers great resolution.
 
Strange to see so little mention of Velvia. For landscape IMO that's a must have if you're into the very vibrant colour sort of thing.
 
mfogiel said:
Plus X [snip] BTW Tri X in D76 1+1 is the standard combination of Michael Kenna, see if you like his photos.
Click to expand...

Plus-X in 120 is, sadly, discontinued.

A lot rides on what medium format you're shooting. I also really like Tri-X in 120, and it gets better the larger the format - but in 645 I'd tend to err towards something finer grained, but in 67, 68 and 69, Tri-X is just beautiful.

Marty
 
hans voralberg said:
Strange to see so little mention of Velvia. For landscape IMO that's a must have if you're into the very vibrant colour sort of thing.
Click to expand...

That is why in my post i wrote for slides only Velvia, i can have nice great results and not necessarily i will always have vivid saturated colors, i have one velvia vibrant but it was not so saturated, in fact i added a bit saturation for it, it depends how to exposure it and to scan it.
 
Freakscene said:
Plus-X in 120 is, sadly, discontinued.

A lot rides on what medium format you're shooting. I also really like Tri-X in 120, and it gets better the larger the format - but in 645 I'd tend to err towards something finer grained, but in 67, 68 and 69, Tri-X is just beautiful.

Marty
Click to expand...

I have few Plus-X in 120 remains [maybe 3 or 4 rolls], i did shoot one, the result was nice but not something unique, in fact i prefer FP4+ over it as they both at same ISO box speed even i can push/pull both of them to another ISO, but i don't feel sorry that Plus-X has gone, if it will come back fine we will be happy but because i am a late person and i tested only once and didn't make more experience with it so i don't miss the film much, i think Kodak knew that this film is less usage than other films like TMAX or Tri-X and those films are amazing for push/pull from ISO50 or 25 up to 1600 or even 3200 [i don't want to say more].
 
I've been primarily using the Portra line for landscapes for years. Great dynamic range and it converts beautifully to black and white using Photoshop. I much prefer c41 over e6 for landscapes.

400VC
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6128/6028985329_e5cd9eb335_z.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3264/5796399207_04f574caf2_z.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4146/4842138801_709df9139f_z.jpg

160NC
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2440/3857615752_97b993822d_z.jpg?zz=1
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3227/2701018687_fcf62f9ac5_z.jpg?zz=1
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3050/5793654228_820ce98acf_z.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4102/4913950219_00afb67c97_z.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4089/4842933310_4aa72c201b_z.jpg

400NC
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3188/2913498286_154c630cb4_z.jpg?zz=1
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3449/3278765180_6ff4cd0243_z.jpg?zz=1
 
Last edited:
I'll vote for Delta 100 as a good all rounder for landscape use. Sharp, fine grained and better behaved than Tmax 100, Pan F etc. Develop in an acutance developer for real bite, or in Xtol 1+1 if you want to make the grain all but impossible to find.

6x7 negs in Xtol will produce grainless 20x24 prints.

If making small prints, say 10x8, it does not matter much what film you use. You wont find grain in TriX and Xtol/DDX at this size.
 
I am a big fan of Velvia. Here is a recent image using Velvia 50 in 120 film. The image was shot using my Mamiya 6 at Rocky Mountain National Park last month.

medium.jpg
 
All of the 400 speed films are great in 120, color, E-6 or B&W.
Portra 800 is a lifesaver in nasty weather. Heck, it's good all the time.
120 Ektar 25 is fabulous if you can find it.
 
shadowfox said:
Roger,

Certainly. But I find that using Adox results in lower contrast images given the same time, developer and agitation regime.

Could it be caused by a different distribution/concentration of silver versus other brands?
Click to expand...


You can't compare films unless they are developed to about the same contrast. If one film is consistently less contrasty you might try developing for a longer time to get contrast comparable to the other films you're comparing.
 
Freakscene said:
Plus-X in 120 is, sadly, discontinued.

A lot rides on what medium format you're shooting. I also really like Tri-X in 120, and it gets better the larger the format - but in 645 I'd tend to err towards something finer grained, but in 67, 68 and 69, Tri-X is just beautiful.

Marty
Click to expand...

Very sadly, re Plus-X. I just did a film trade with a guy in Mexico to get some (unexpired) Plus-X in 120. The most expensive film I have in the fridge :).

I've been loving Tri-X @ 200 on sunny days, in Rodinal 1+50 for 10 minutes, 10s agitation every 2 minutes (at 70-72F).


arkansas river near co highway 24 by mike thomas, on Flickr



cherry knolls park by mike thomas, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
mathomas said:
Very sadly, re Plus-X. I just did a film trade with a guy in Mexico to get some (unexpired) Plus-X in 120. The most expensive film I have in the fridge :).

I've been loving Tri-X @ 200 on sunny days, in Rodinal 1+50 for 10 minutes, 10s agitation every 2 minutes (at 70-72F).


arkansas river near co highway 24 by mike thomas, on Flickr



cherry knolls park by mike thomas, on Flickr
Click to expand...


Plus-X is/was tonally unique. I love it. Tri-X is the closest tonally to Plus-X and the bigger the format the closer/nicer it is. These are very nice photos, and to me their tonality is exquisite. I have a huge stash of 135 Plus-X and wish I'd done the same with LF and MF. But these remind me that there are other ways to get something similar.

Marty
 
The new Portra 400 is amazing. Most other colour films are too saturated, which i dont understand the point of nowadays, Its easy to get vivid colours with digital but less so subtle graduations.

My only choice of colour film is Portra.
 
john_s said:
You can't compare films unless they are developed to about the same contrast. If one film is consistently less contrasty you might try developing for a longer time to get contrast comparable to the other films you're comparing.
Click to expand...

Well, yes, but a short-toe film is vastly more sensitive to increased or decreased development, so he's sort of right. Silver concentration has relatively little to do with this but crystal size, shape and uniformity matter a very great deal.

@Shadowfox: sorry I missed the query first time around: I think I was away.

Cheers,

R.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom