cp_ste.croix
At the beginning again.
So i've just decided to go back to B&W photography and have been reading around about developers and films and whatnot and have come to the conclusion that I should really experiment with different films and devo combos.
That said, I just don't have the cash, as I'd really like to start bulk loading film and can't afford to get more than one or two 100' rolls.
My situation right now is that I'm probably not going to develop my own within the next few months as I want a scanner first so I can see the images, rather than just a bunch of negs hanging around. That said, I am an impulse kind of guy, and as soon as I do get a scanner I'll want to develop at home.
So, what I'm looking for is reccomendations for my film needs as well as eventual developer combos. Shooting I do: street/documentary work, geometric/pattern stuff (i hope it's not as boring as it sounds), non-studio portraits, and available light. I like rich looking, contrasty pictures and generally try and shoot for the shadows (i can find examples of this if it helps). I don't mind a little grain, but would like to be able to print to 11x17 if needed sometimes (i know this has a lot to do with ISO, lens sharpness, etc...).
I like ISO 100 and 400, and haven't really shot with faster ever but wouldn't be adverse to it at all. I will primarily be using my GSN and QL17 for my B&W stuff.
BTW, I am thinking of getting a minolta scanner or a Nikon, as I'd like to be able to have the lab print from my scans...if that makes any difference. You know, my mother is into stamp collecting...why couldn't i have picked a cheap hobby like that? I'm gonna have to sell off my SCUBA gear. :bang:
That said, I just don't have the cash, as I'd really like to start bulk loading film and can't afford to get more than one or two 100' rolls.
My situation right now is that I'm probably not going to develop my own within the next few months as I want a scanner first so I can see the images, rather than just a bunch of negs hanging around. That said, I am an impulse kind of guy, and as soon as I do get a scanner I'll want to develop at home.
So, what I'm looking for is reccomendations for my film needs as well as eventual developer combos. Shooting I do: street/documentary work, geometric/pattern stuff (i hope it's not as boring as it sounds), non-studio portraits, and available light. I like rich looking, contrasty pictures and generally try and shoot for the shadows (i can find examples of this if it helps). I don't mind a little grain, but would like to be able to print to 11x17 if needed sometimes (i know this has a lot to do with ISO, lens sharpness, etc...).
I like ISO 100 and 400, and haven't really shot with faster ever but wouldn't be adverse to it at all. I will primarily be using my GSN and QL17 for my B&W stuff.
BTW, I am thinking of getting a minolta scanner or a Nikon, as I'd like to be able to have the lab print from my scans...if that makes any difference. You know, my mother is into stamp collecting...why couldn't i have picked a cheap hobby like that? I'm gonna have to sell off my SCUBA gear. :bang:
phototone
Well-known
You can develop ANYTHING in D-76, ANYTHING...it is cheap and good. I use it diluted 1 to 1 with water as a one shot. (Use it once and dump it down the drain) Always consistant, has good shelf life mixed up. and..........IT WILL DEVELOP ANYTHING.
It is the standard you start with to compare your other developers to.
Ilford ID-11 is the same thing. ID-11 is identical to D-76.
There is a big developer/film time and temperature list somewhere on the web, don't remember where now. It is maybe 100 pages. I printed it out, hole-punched it, put it into a ring binder, and use it. Know what? Every film listed (as far as I can see) has developing times for Kodak D-76 straight and D-76 1+1 dilution.
So a gallon of D-76 powder, a bottle of Kodak Rapid-Fix w/hardener, a Nikor Stainless Steel Tank and reel. (tank and reel purchased used) Maybe set you back $25. total. Get some old bottles, clean them out thoroughly to put your mixed up chemicals in. Get a cheap darkroom thermometer, you can scrounge around. Many darkrooms are being thrown out in the trash. Ask around. Get a cheap plastic pail from Wally World to mix chemicals in. etc.
It is the standard you start with to compare your other developers to.
Ilford ID-11 is the same thing. ID-11 is identical to D-76.
There is a big developer/film time and temperature list somewhere on the web, don't remember where now. It is maybe 100 pages. I printed it out, hole-punched it, put it into a ring binder, and use it. Know what? Every film listed (as far as I can see) has developing times for Kodak D-76 straight and D-76 1+1 dilution.
So a gallon of D-76 powder, a bottle of Kodak Rapid-Fix w/hardener, a Nikor Stainless Steel Tank and reel. (tank and reel purchased used) Maybe set you back $25. total. Get some old bottles, clean them out thoroughly to put your mixed up chemicals in. Get a cheap darkroom thermometer, you can scrounge around. Many darkrooms are being thrown out in the trash. Ask around. Get a cheap plastic pail from Wally World to mix chemicals in. etc.
thmk
Well-known
I assume you mean the Massive Dev Chart here http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html
Mostly I use Kodak Plus-X 125 and Kodak Tri-X 400 in D76 (1:1) because I started with this and I like the results. Being a bit limited in time for experiments my only other combination is Fuji Neopan 400 and 1600 in Calbe A49 (now Adox ATM49).
Cheers
Thomas-Michael
Mostly I use Kodak Plus-X 125 and Kodak Tri-X 400 in D76 (1:1) because I started with this and I like the results. Being a bit limited in time for experiments my only other combination is Fuji Neopan 400 and 1600 in Calbe A49 (now Adox ATM49).
Cheers
Thomas-Michael
2maneekameras
home on the rangefinder
I recommend trying one film and one developer combo at first. try it for six months, play around with exposure latitude and development. I would suggest triX and Hc110. The concentrate is easy to mix I uses 1:31 and skip making the stock solution. The concentrate is resistant to oxidation. You could also play around with alternative home made developers such as coffee and sodium carbonate combo for the developer and salt water for the fixer. This is really cheap, but development times are longer.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
If you are scanning, XP2 is hard to beat.
I'll take a completely contrarian view on the 'one film, one dev' theory. One dev, maybe: I'd choose Ilford DDX for incredible shelf life and high convenience, or Paterson FX39 for high sharpness and excellent tonality with almost everything, but a rather short shelf life.
But with film I'd be completely promiscuous at first. Buy a couple of rolls of anything you can find and afford. In 40 years I've found first, that some combinations are inherently magic; second, that some combinations are a disaster; third, that what works for me won't ncessarily work for you, and vice versa; and fourth, that the magic or disaster is almost invariably visible in the first roll or two. You can refine it after that, but if you inadvertently start out with the 'one dev, one flm' combination that DOESN'T work for you, it can be very dispiriting -- and even such 'bulletproof' combinations as HP5 in DDX or Tri-X in D76 won't suit everyone.
If cost s a consideration consider Paterson Acupan 200, a gorgeous film but only ISO 200 in speed-increasing developers: more like 125 in D-76.
You might also want to take a look at Photo School on www.rogerandfrances.com. Most of it is free but if you want o buy a couple of the paid-for modules I shan't complain...
Cheers,
Roger
I'll take a completely contrarian view on the 'one film, one dev' theory. One dev, maybe: I'd choose Ilford DDX for incredible shelf life and high convenience, or Paterson FX39 for high sharpness and excellent tonality with almost everything, but a rather short shelf life.
But with film I'd be completely promiscuous at first. Buy a couple of rolls of anything you can find and afford. In 40 years I've found first, that some combinations are inherently magic; second, that some combinations are a disaster; third, that what works for me won't ncessarily work for you, and vice versa; and fourth, that the magic or disaster is almost invariably visible in the first roll or two. You can refine it after that, but if you inadvertently start out with the 'one dev, one flm' combination that DOESN'T work for you, it can be very dispiriting -- and even such 'bulletproof' combinations as HP5 in DDX or Tri-X in D76 won't suit everyone.
If cost s a consideration consider Paterson Acupan 200, a gorgeous film but only ISO 200 in speed-increasing developers: more like 125 in D-76.
You might also want to take a look at Photo School on www.rogerandfrances.com. Most of it is free but if you want o buy a couple of the paid-for modules I shan't complain...
Cheers,
Roger
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
Stamp collecting can get very expensive!
cp_ste.croix
At the beginning again.
Pherdinand said:
ahhh, no she collects rubber ink stamps to make cards and invitations with...you'd be amazed the number of older ladies doing this.
And thanks everyone!
peter_n
Veteran
I was in the same position as you about 9 months ago, and I too like saturated and contrasty B&W. I took on a 3 year project and started to look around seriously for a "standard" film. I went through a number - bigs like Kodak, Ilford, Fuji, smaller brands like Efke and Fomapan.
To cut a long story short, I ended up with Fuji Neopan - I use all of them but the 400 is a fantastic all-round film with a low grain look. It also scans very well, I'm a bit of an amateur scanner but I don't do any post processing with my scans and they look OK. I get my films developed in a lab that uses XTOL and the Neopan 400/XTOL combo works very well. I was on vaca a couple of weeks ago and put a bunch of my vacation snaps into my gallery here. If you can bear to look at vacation pics I think they're representative of the "look" of Neopan.
To cut a long story short, I ended up with Fuji Neopan - I use all of them but the 400 is a fantastic all-round film with a low grain look. It also scans very well, I'm a bit of an amateur scanner but I don't do any post processing with my scans and they look OK. I get my films developed in a lab that uses XTOL and the Neopan 400/XTOL combo works very well. I was on vaca a couple of weeks ago and put a bunch of my vacation snaps into my gallery here. If you can bear to look at vacation pics I think they're representative of the "look" of Neopan.
Rick Waldroup
Well-known
Neopan 400 developed in Rodinal will make the negatives "pop", but it will also increase the grain. This is all I shoot.