Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Juan,
in my experience testing a new film is not a big issue. I even like that.
Digital photographers often buy a new camera every two years and have to test the new sensor and camera software how it works in different conditions.
They accept that and don't complain.
Film photographers complain when they have to use a new film after using one film for 20 years....
Sorry, I think lots of film photographers are spoiled and a bit inflexible.
Stop crying, start shooting.
Cheers,
Jan
It's not an issue for me either, and I think it isn't for others around here... And we enjoy it too, a lot. And we don't cry... And we shoot... I think most of us use and have used lots of films... It looks like some things are not how you pretend they are with words...
Your post was a bit... imaginative... I'm glad you feel different and special... No matter if you keep using the forum to say it...
Cheers,
Juan
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Juan, very refreshing attitude! I didn't follow the entire thread however you've taken a thoughtful approach. I respect that.
Regarding the concern for Neopan; one reason I like it is it is an excellent low light film for long exposures. If you look at reciprocity charts you will see the curves for this film are substantially flatter than most other films. It's entirely possible that there are similar product monographs from Kodak or Ilford but I haven't seen them.
It's a good film. I'll miss it and yes I'll shoot HP5+ and TriX like I have for years but that doesn't mean I should not be disappointed at the loss of a truly wonderful BW film.
@Jan... coffee, tea, water and wine have been around a long time too what's your point.
Thanks for your words, Jan...
And by the way, nice shot! Great creamy tone for medium and low grays... Quite clean!
Cheers,
Juan
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
As an aside ... sort of:
I was thinking about experimenting with another 400 black and white film in 35mm for a project I have in mind that I'm not sure neopan will give me the results I'm after ... it can be a little bit 'clean' at times.
Going to Freestyle's website and perusing the 400 black and white films available surprised me somewhat ... the selection is a bit 'light on' IMO!
What think you people of Delta 400 as a matter of interest?
I was thinking about experimenting with another 400 black and white film in 35mm for a project I have in mind that I'm not sure neopan will give me the results I'm after ... it can be a little bit 'clean' at times.
Going to Freestyle's website and perusing the 400 black and white films available surprised me somewhat ... the selection is a bit 'light on' IMO!
What think you people of Delta 400 as a matter of interest?
jmcd
Well-known
"...it can be a little bit 'clean' at times...
What think you people of Delta 400 as a matter of interest?"
Very fast (twice as fast as HP5+ in my set-up). But, also very "clean."
You can get a very hard edged, gritty look with HP5+ in D-76 or Rodinal, if you develop it sufficiently. You can actually overdevelop this print by a good bit and get a wonderfully toned print. In direct light I shoot this at ei 200-250, and develop for 12-1/2 minutes in D-76 1:1, a good bit more than the recommendation, but not overdeveloped. Unlike with Tri-X, a too-thin HP5+ negative cannot be squeezed to make a great print, at least in my efforts.
Foma 400 in Xtol 1:1 looks fantastic and not so clean (ei 200 in direct light, ei 400 in flat).
What think you people of Delta 400 as a matter of interest?"
Very fast (twice as fast as HP5+ in my set-up). But, also very "clean."
You can get a very hard edged, gritty look with HP5+ in D-76 or Rodinal, if you develop it sufficiently. You can actually overdevelop this print by a good bit and get a wonderfully toned print. In direct light I shoot this at ei 200-250, and develop for 12-1/2 minutes in D-76 1:1, a good bit more than the recommendation, but not overdeveloped. Unlike with Tri-X, a too-thin HP5+ negative cannot be squeezed to make a great print, at least in my efforts.
Foma 400 in Xtol 1:1 looks fantastic and not so clean (ei 200 in direct light, ei 400 in flat).
jmcd
Well-known
I meant to add that I really like Delta 400 in Xtol 1:1, and find the recommended speed and development times spot on.
robert blu
quiet photographer
delta as possible alternative
delta as possible alternative
I like delta 400 but never tried the Neopan 400 (ok I tried it but did not develop myself so not a real evaluation).
delta as possible alternative
I like delta 400 but never tried the Neopan 400 (ok I tried it but did not develop myself so not a real evaluation).
Turtle
Veteran
Delta 400 has a more modern tonality than the traditional films and is also clean looking. It has extremely fine grain compared to the likes of HP5+ and TriX and although finer than Neopan 400, is not worlds better. Neopan sits somewhere in between.
I find the tonality a bit too 'digital' most of the time but have some lovely image from it. Its incredible in 120 when you want an almost grainless 20x24 with liquid sky tones, clouds etc.
Personally I would not use it for my only film, but I find it handy to keep some rolls around. I develop in Xtol 1+2 for more than the recc times, which I find too low.
As for speed, I find it marginally faster than TriX, HP5 etc. About 1/3 stop or so.
I find the tonality a bit too 'digital' most of the time but have some lovely image from it. Its incredible in 120 when you want an almost grainless 20x24 with liquid sky tones, clouds etc.
Personally I would not use it for my only film, but I find it handy to keep some rolls around. I develop in Xtol 1+2 for more than the recc times, which I find too low.
As for speed, I find it marginally faster than TriX, HP5 etc. About 1/3 stop or so.
jan normandale
Film is the other way
turtle.. can you put up a couple of sample images of the Delta
Turtle
Veteran
Jan,
I can't unfortunately! I don't have anything in digital format and I am overseas for an extended period.
The best description would be to say that it is like a faster Delta 100 but possibly not quite as appealing somehow. IMHO, much better tonality-wise than Tmax 100 in that sense, but still from the modern mould.
With dilute Xtol (a developer almost universally regarded as one of the best for this film) grain is vanishingly small in 120. On my last 20x24 it is nothing you would notice unless very close and sniffing the print. It has a superb grey scale and good separation but seems to have that straight line separation of mid tones expected from most modern films. I prefer traditional emulsions in general, but D400 is MILES finer in grain than HP5 or TriX if you need that. Its a very good film and seems quite forgiving in exposure and development all things considered.
Shot in 120 it allows you to beat with 120 and 400 what 35mm and 100 can achieve by a good margin. Wonderful film for anything where liquid tones, especially where you want good highlight separation would be good, are important. Personally, as I know the film now, I would not use it as my main 400. I have shot about 40-50 rolls in the last year.
I can't unfortunately! I don't have anything in digital format and I am overseas for an extended period.
The best description would be to say that it is like a faster Delta 100 but possibly not quite as appealing somehow. IMHO, much better tonality-wise than Tmax 100 in that sense, but still from the modern mould.
With dilute Xtol (a developer almost universally regarded as one of the best for this film) grain is vanishingly small in 120. On my last 20x24 it is nothing you would notice unless very close and sniffing the print. It has a superb grey scale and good separation but seems to have that straight line separation of mid tones expected from most modern films. I prefer traditional emulsions in general, but D400 is MILES finer in grain than HP5 or TriX if you need that. Its a very good film and seems quite forgiving in exposure and development all things considered.
Shot in 120 it allows you to beat with 120 and 400 what 35mm and 100 can achieve by a good margin. Wonderful film for anything where liquid tones, especially where you want good highlight separation would be good, are important. Personally, as I know the film now, I would not use it as my main 400. I have shot about 40-50 rolls in the last year.
Uncle Bill
Well-known
To my understanding the Foma 200 issue was an important ingredient got discontinued and Foma is doing it's best to create a "new and improved" 200.
As for Neopan 400 in 120, I think it has something to do with the backing and static and the particular chemical in question that Fuji uses to combat that is not environmentally friendly. Taking a glass half full approach, hopefully they source a new chemical that say Ilford or Kodak usefor the same purpose and it falls with local environmental regs.
tensai
Established
I just found some 120 neopan on Amazon Japan. They only had 2 in stock, but not anymore (I bought them). I wonder if they get some more in from some secret stash somewhere.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I'm curious about the Arista EDU Ultra that Freestyle sells ... it's incredibly cheap and apparently is made in the Cech Republic.
I'm looking for a really inexpensive film in 4x5 to feed my Crown Graphic and I noticed it's under .50c per sheet and just over $2.00 per roll in 120 for 100 or 400 ISO.
Does anyone have any real experience with this film and ideas about it's actual origins?
I'm looking for a really inexpensive film in 4x5 to feed my Crown Graphic and I noticed it's under .50c per sheet and just over $2.00 per roll in 120 for 100 or 400 ISO.
Does anyone have any real experience with this film and ideas about it's actual origins?
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Its Foma film. I like the 100 and 400. They have nice tonality and look very sharp, but they are grainier than Tri-X by a bit and are much more so than Tmax 400. They have a unique look. The only real downer is that very bright things will sometimes have a glow or halo. I suspect it hasn't got an anti-halation backing.
Ken Smith
Why yes Ma'am - it folds
With Neopan 400 out of production and no expected replacement (per Fuji Film), which available 120 film would have the closest attributes? I was in the middle of collecting gear for home developing and had planned on using Neopan 400 in my folders then the bottom fell out on this. Great time on my part
mgd711
Medium Format Baby!!
Keith,
Try looking on E Bay for Era 100 film. I got 50 sheets a while a go From a Taiwanese seller for around $25. I didn’t expect much but it’s not bad film.
Isaac Chen E Bay store
Last edited:
Tim Gray
Well-known
With Neopan 400 out of production and no expected replacement (per Fuji Film), which available 120 film would have the closest attributes? I was in the middle of collecting gear for home developing and had planned on using Neopan 400 in my folders then the bottom fell out on this. Great time on my part
Why not just use Tri-X? Or HP5+?
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
The Fuji stuff was a lot cheaper, thats why everyone is upset about it. For 35mm you can still get Neopan 400 but if it were gone too, there are other good cheap films, like the rebranded Freestyle Tri-X. Not so in medium format and sheet films.
Freakscene
Obscure member
Price was irrelevant to me - it's results I want and I don't mind paying for that.
The tonality of Neopan 400 is different to HP5+ or Tri-X. One thing I like is to be able to use the same film in 35 mm and MF to retain the same tonality when sets of images are presented together. I'll either have to struggle to make 120 Tri-X or HP5+ look like Neopan, or also switch for 35 mm. Either way it means more experimenting when my system had been stable for almost 10 years.
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/freakscene/Russia/Kitchen.jpg.html
Rolleiflex 2.8F Xenotar, 120 Neopan 400, Xtol 1+3.
Marty
The tonality of Neopan 400 is different to HP5+ or Tri-X. One thing I like is to be able to use the same film in 35 mm and MF to retain the same tonality when sets of images are presented together. I'll either have to struggle to make 120 Tri-X or HP5+ look like Neopan, or also switch for 35 mm. Either way it means more experimenting when my system had been stable for almost 10 years.
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/freakscene/Russia/Kitchen.jpg.html
Rolleiflex 2.8F Xenotar, 120 Neopan 400, Xtol 1+3.
Marty
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
That's like asking why not just drink beer or cider when the world's supply of shiraz dwindles!I'm shocked at such a proposal!
Ken Smith
Why yes Ma'am - it folds
While the price of Neopan was attractive , honestly - it was the look of the pictures that caught my eye. Sharp, fine grained, and lots of detail. I'm not a fan of grainy pictures.