B&W film recommendations?

C

cz23

-
Local time
12:51 PM
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
1,781
I'm heading out on vacation next month and plan to take my Rollei TLR. I have not used it in 30 years or so and switched to digital early on. So I'm really out of touch with film. Can you suggest a B&W film? I'd like something fairly slow, tight grained, with smooth tonal gradation, and relatively low contrast. Way back when I used PlusX and FP4.

For now I'll use lab processing, so if you can recommend a USA lab for processing/scanning, I'd appreciate that, too.
This is an experiment in returning to film. If I like the process, I'll develop and scan myself.

Appreciate your help.

John
 
Acros 100 + Neopan 400 + Delta 3200 in ratio 10:3:1. That should work fine. Souped in Rodinal 1+50 (not sure for the last one, gonna check it next week).
 
Not too many bad b/w films out there, honestly--why not ask the lab you'll be using for processing what they're experienced with/prefer?

Their chemistry and processing is what's going to be the key to a good photo, not just the film. You could use the best film in the world, but if they have no experience with it, it might end up not looking the way you want.
 
In 120 size, the best choice is between Ilford FP4+ and Kodak Plus X, Acros in my opinion is tonally inferior(but has smaller grain) however my advice would be to just use Tri X - in 6x6 size the grain is not a big problem, and this is a film difficult to trump for tonality and overall tolerance. If you prefer a modern look, then TMY-2 could be a good option. Medium format is limited by lens speed and DOF, so with a 400 ISO film you would be shooting at 1/500 and f16 in the best case, but you will have some leeway for shots in low light or in interiors, with slower film you are always borderline if you shoot handheld.

A Tri X shot:

4448344464_d61e19a457_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
I go on holiday on Thursday, and am taking a shed-load of Fomapan 200 and 100, just been trying it out and am very impressed,
Dave.
4560274494_e7721e50af_b.jpg
 
If PlusX and FP4+ worked for you back then, they will probably still work now...

My personal preference for B/W films is Ilford FP4+ and HP5+. Ran a few rolls of Fomapan 100 through my Yashica Mat 124, this is not bad either.

Maybe you want to try the newer films like TMax and Delta, but I like the older ones better.
 
Efke 25. When you say "fairly slow," this should suffice! Beautiful tones. I don't think there's a clear consensus on any one "best" developer to soup it in. I'm doing it in Ilfosol, only because it's the only developer I can get locally in liquid concentrate. It works, but surely it is not the best match.
--Dave
 
My choice would be Neopan 400 developed in Rodinal 100+1...that's what I do with the Yashica Mat 124...it really shows what that lens is capable of...
 
If you're taking it to the lab, try Kodak 400 CN. It's C41 process, so any lab ought to handle it. I wouldn't call it fairly slow, but I love the results.
3344955455_45e674856b.jpg


3492435406_5844699f83.jpg
 
Another vote for FP4 plus (which isn't far removed from the original FP4 you used to use): and for Delta 100 if you'd like a more "modern" look: i.e. frighteningly sharp but (in the view of some) perhaps a little sanitized and cold.

But it's a uniquely subjective thing, taste...

Regards.
D.
 
I had been using FP4 for a long time in 120 and finally decided that it's a boring film for my tastes (I'm a Tri-X shooter all the way). Recently tried some Ilford Delta Pro 100 and like it a lot. Whatever you do, try out some films BEFORE you go. Not during your trip.

Why not buy several different films and get them developed before you go? Like all things photographic, what I or others like is simply our personal tastes. Might not be yours.
 
brachal said:
If you're taking it to the lab, try Kodak 400 CN. It's C41 process, so any lab ought to handle it. I wouldn't call it fairly slow, but I love the results.
Click to expand...

Isn't BW400CN discontinued in 120? Anyway, Ilford XP2 is available and worth considering. Consensus for these two seems to be that the true speed is more like 250 - 320.

Since you don't plan to develop your own, and don't have a specific lab in mind yet, either, this would be the safest bet.

Or indeed, shoot in color and convert later. Kodak Ektar comes to mind. You can dial down the contrast to your liking in PP.
 
Thanks, everyone. I think I'll stick with Plus-X and FP4 for now. It's familiar and readily available. I'll dabble in some new films once I get rolling. Really appreciate all the suggestions.

John
 
If you plan to do your own scanning, I would recommend a C-41 film such as XP2 or BW400CN. You should be aware that Digital Ice will not work with conventional B&W films. Of course, if you enjoy spending lots of time in Photoshop using the clone and healing brush tools. . .
 
I'm all for FP4+ with my Rolleiflex but do occasionally shoot HP5+ too. I recently bought two rolls of PanF to give it a try, but haven't had a chance yet.
 
Dave Jenkins said:
If you plan to do your own scanning, I would recommend a C-41 film such as XP2 or BW400CN. You should be aware that Digital Ice will not work with conventional B&W films. Of course, if you enjoy spending lots of time in Photoshop using the clone and healing brush tools. . .
Click to expand...

What's wrong with wiping the scanner glass with a clean lint-free cloth and some anti-static glass cleaner, and lint-free gloves and an anti-static brush for the negs, like we used in the wet darkroom? If you think the clone tool is a pain, try retouching the old-fashioned way!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom