What B+W film is the easiest to develop?

kshapero

kshapero

South Florida Man
Local time
9:28 AM
Joined
Mar 27, 2006
Messages
10,044
What B+W film is the easiest to develop? I am looking to get back into developing negs in my bathroom. I will then scan into computer for prints.
Please give me recommendations on the easiest B+W film to use. probably 400 ISO/ASA, but could be slower, too. I shoot mainly in very sunny Florida.
 
My choice would be one of Tri-X or HP5. Both are quite forgiving of exposure and development errors, and push/pull very well so are extremely flexible. I think Tri-X has a slight edge over HP5 for push processing, but I don't want to start another Tri-X vs HP5 thread here :)

The t-grain films (delta and tmax) are typically a little more fussy so I generally wouldn't start out there.

Regarding developers, you didn't ask, but I usually suggest HC-110 or LC29 (Ilford almost-equivalent) since the liquid form is much more convenient.
 
Yes, go for TriX or HP5. If you constantly shoot bright sunny shots daytime, you should consider downrating the film a stop or so and cut development about 20-25% to keep the contrast from running away.

TriX and D76 is a classic combo for a reason :)
 
Excellent help. I kind figure that Tri-x would still be a good choice. Did a lot of Tri-X in the 80"s. Deja Vu here I come.
 
While I love Tri-X, I am going to jump in with a vote for a slower film, such as FP4+, APX100 (get it while you can) or even PanF+. Shooting a higher speed film in bright conditions is very constraining for me; it's difficult to open up so as to reduce DOF when you want to. You could use neutral density filters, but that's a PITA and you're putting another piece of glass in front of a good RF lens.

All of the films I mentioned are easy to develop, with the possible exception of PanF, but in that case it is really simply a matter of dialing in your working EI and developer of choice.
 
Another vote for Tri-X or HP5+. Pretty tough to screw either of them up. Kodak D-76 (or Ilford's equivalent ID-11) is delicious in both emulsions.
 
I would use a liquid developer like Kodak HC-110; very easy to use and long shelf life. Unless you like to use small apertures, consider slower films like Ilford FP4 or Agfa APX100 which is available and still cheaper than anything else. If you want to stay at 400ISO HP5 works well with HC-110.
 
Earl knows

Earl knows

Trius said:
While I love Tri-X, I am going to jump in with a vote for a slower film, such as FP4+, APX100 (get it while you can) or even PanF+. Shooting a higher speed film in bright conditions is very constraining for me; it's difficult to open up so as to reduce DOF when you want to. You could use neutral density filters, but that's a PITA and you're putting another piece of glass in front of a good RF lens.

All of the films I mentioned are easy to develop, with the possible exception of PanF, but in that case it is really simply a matter of dialing in your working EI and developer of choice.
Click to expand...

What Earl said. Not that he ever sees any Florida sun :D , but the premise is correct.

When you've mastered a slow emulsion in the Florida sun, break out the Tri-X & Rodinal and go play in the dark. :D Does your meter go to 12,500???????? :cool:

Yes, the easiest are the C-41 B&W films processed in your local 1-hour lab. If you can find a good one. Next easiest is any film you drop in the mail to Dwayne's Photo in Kansas. Kodachrome, C-41, B&W, 135 & 120. Dwayne's does it all.
 
I find Fuji Neopan 400 a very consistent product for me. It works well with almost every developer I've tried and I've almost never messed up with it.

However, I am shooting in the UK where it always seems to be dull. The chromogenic films -- XP2, Neopan 400CN, etc -- are also good in those conditions.

In bright sun my favourite film is Pan-F, although, as others have said, it can be a bit tricky to develop. My local mini-lab does a great job with it, though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom