SCOTFORTHLAD
Slow learner,but keen!
I just have to have a go at 35mm.home b/w processing again---the last time was at least 10 years ago using FP4 and Ilfosol,and I never printed,but took my negs to a lab.
I now tend to use lab processed xp2 almost all the time,but as a novice I would welcome views on the best 400asa film and developer combination for simple scanning.
I have no great 'artistic 'ambitions,just looking for a combination which would reliably give me reasonably contrasty prints on a regular basis.
Film choices I assume would be HP5,Foma, or Agfa if I could find some.
Thanks in advance,
Brian.
I now tend to use lab processed xp2 almost all the time,but as a novice I would welcome views on the best 400asa film and developer combination for simple scanning.
I have no great 'artistic 'ambitions,just looking for a combination which would reliably give me reasonably contrasty prints on a regular basis.
Film choices I assume would be HP5,Foma, or Agfa if I could find some.
Thanks in advance,
Brian.
Last edited:
Xmas
Veteran
Brian
The simplest dev is Rodinal - both Ash and I use it almost exclusively. It is ok for speeds up to 100 ASA, it can get grainy expecially with the digital sampling processing of a scanner, for faster film.
Every one bought lots of cheap bulk film, I'll send you a bulk roll when I get back from Se Monday week. Ash will tell you where to get cassettes cheap.
Noel
P.S. I recall you are an ex-colour processor so none of this novice... B&W easy.
The simplest dev is Rodinal - both Ash and I use it almost exclusively. It is ok for speeds up to 100 ASA, it can get grainy expecially with the digital sampling processing of a scanner, for faster film.
Every one bought lots of cheap bulk film, I'll send you a bulk roll when I get back from Se Monday week. Ash will tell you where to get cassettes cheap.
Noel
P.S. I recall you are an ex-colour processor so none of this novice... B&W easy.
kully
Happy Snapper
Brian,
HP5+ is great, I managed with it and I was a _real_ novice.
For scanning I'd go for less contrast and increase it later.
I'd recommend Diafine for your developer as it is so bloody easy to use, cheap and the negs are lower contrast for better scanning.
But not with HP5+, it's nice with the Agfa 400S that everyone went mad with, as Noel says, and bought millions of rolls worth.
If you're used to scanning in XP2, however, anything else will be a bit of a disappointment.
I have bags full of empty 35mm cassettes from Jessops, so don't worry about those.
EDIT: Eeek! I've remembered I still need to post your Mir case - I'll pop it in the post with some Agfa 400S.
HP5+ is great, I managed with it and I was a _real_ novice.
For scanning I'd go for less contrast and increase it later.
I'd recommend Diafine for your developer as it is so bloody easy to use, cheap and the negs are lower contrast for better scanning.
But not with HP5+, it's nice with the Agfa 400S that everyone went mad with, as Noel says, and bought millions of rolls worth.
If you're used to scanning in XP2, however, anything else will be a bit of a disappointment.
I have bags full of empty 35mm cassettes from Jessops, so don't worry about those.
EDIT: Eeek! I've remembered I still need to post your Mir case - I'll pop it in the post with some Agfa 400S.
wintoid
Back to film
My choices would be one of
HP5 and DDX
Neopan400 and Diafine
TriX and XTOL
ID11 or D76 is also fairly foolproof with any of those films.
HP5 and DDX
Neopan400 and Diafine
TriX and XTOL
ID11 or D76 is also fairly foolproof with any of those films.
like2fiddle
Curious
Brian,
If you're going to use HP5, then you should consider D76/ID-11 or HC-110. For ease of use, HC-110 is nice because you mix just what you need. I've always wanted to try Rodinal, but I shoot mostly 400 film, and as Noel pointed out, it is reportedly better for 100 and slower films.
If you're going to use HP5, then you should consider D76/ID-11 or HC-110. For ease of use, HC-110 is nice because you mix just what you need. I've always wanted to try Rodinal, but I shoot mostly 400 film, and as Noel pointed out, it is reportedly better for 100 and slower films.
mich8261
Well-known
take this with a grain of salt as I am a real nooby (see my other posts on developing!), but I would suggest Kodak Tri-X in D-76 (1:1). This is what they had us use for the basic B&W class. Worked great for me.
clintock
Galleryless Gearhead
Another vote for HP5 and D-76 1:1.. I think the Hp5 is more like the old Tri-X I used in school (back when 'The Young Ones' was a new show) than Tri-X is now, if that makes sense.
pesphoto
Veteran
mich8261 said:
A good place to start. Rodinal is a good combo also wiht TriX
I use Sprint developer. but dont know if its available where you are. Its very similar to D76 but its a liquid.
deadsexy
Member
I'd recommend Tri-X with X-tol or D76. Start with D76.
kully
Happy Snapper
DDX is great, my favourite with HP5+. But it is sooo expensive!
Rhoyle
Well-known
TriX in D76 is a great combo. The only thing I can suggest that might be easier is TMax 400 in TMax developer.
BH
BH
SCOTFORTHLAD
Slow learner,but keen!
Wow !! I'm spoilt for choice!
Noel,You have found me out--you right on the 'novice' point,I have done quite a bit off E6,so the mechanics of the developing process should be ok.for me,but I am pretty vague on the finer points of the various developers, and will have to do a bit of research before I feel confident in comparing the merits of different negatives.So a bit of reading to do.Many thanks for the generosity.
Kully,Thanks for the help.Although I am used to XP2,I have only just located an add-on negative light-lid for my scanner,so to date I have only scanned prints---another learning curve.Thinking about it,I could possibly get a C41 kit,and develope XP2 myself.
I had completely forgotten about Tri X I can't think why---it was the first film that gave me acceptable lab prints years ago when I started all -year -round ship photography.That's worth more thought as well.
Thanks again everyone.
Brian.
Noel,You have found me out--you right on the 'novice' point,I have done quite a bit off E6,so the mechanics of the developing process should be ok.for me,but I am pretty vague on the finer points of the various developers, and will have to do a bit of research before I feel confident in comparing the merits of different negatives.So a bit of reading to do.Many thanks for the generosity.
Kully,Thanks for the help.Although I am used to XP2,I have only just located an add-on negative light-lid for my scanner,so to date I have only scanned prints---another learning curve.Thinking about it,I could possibly get a C41 kit,and develope XP2 myself.
I had completely forgotten about Tri X
I can't think why---it was the first film that gave me acceptable lab prints years ago when I started all -year -round ship photography.That's worth more thought as well.Thanks again everyone.
Brian.
40oz
...
Tri-X in D-76 1:1 is economical, cheap, easy, and fairly forgiving, in my experience. D-76 doesn't last forever, so if you find it's turning brown before you use it up, HC-110 might be the better option as it seems to last forever. Developing times in D-76 1:1 can get longish, so if you are a bit ADD, HC-110 can speed things up.
I don't really think there is a bad choice, but there is definitely personal preference, so don't be afraid to try out different combinations. Your best results will come after using a single film/developer extensively, so keep that in mind. There is no reason to use a mix you don't like, but at the same time, if you never settle on a combination you like, you will never be able to comfortably and reliably push/pull/manipulate contrast either.
I tried a few different films before Tri-X, and a couple different developers before and after D-76 1:1, and Tri-X in that is my favorite by far.
I don't really think there is a bad choice, but there is definitely personal preference, so don't be afraid to try out different combinations. Your best results will come after using a single film/developer extensively, so keep that in mind. There is no reason to use a mix you don't like, but at the same time, if you never settle on a combination you like, you will never be able to comfortably and reliably push/pull/manipulate contrast either.
I tried a few different films before Tri-X, and a couple different developers before and after D-76 1:1, and Tri-X in that is my favorite by far.
P C Headland
Well-known
If you want nice and easy, with easy to scan negatives, Diafine is a good option. For your films, you could use Neopan 400 and expose it at 650, and TriX for low light (EI 1000-1600). For something a little slower (~EI200), you can use Acros or FP4+.
If you want to go the DIY route, I'd strongly suggest mixing up some PC-TEA. You can get the ingredients from Silverfast or Retrophotographic. Very economical, versatile, lasts a long time, and scans well.
In the end, it'll come down to what is easy for you to source.
If you want to go the DIY route, I'd strongly suggest mixing up some PC-TEA. You can get the ingredients from Silverfast or Retrophotographic. Very economical, versatile, lasts a long time, and scans well.
In the end, it'll come down to what is easy for you to source.
Max Power
Well-known
Delta 400 in either ID-11 or DDX
Pretty interesting with Rodinal too.
Pretty interesting with Rodinal too.
there is no such a thing as "best". given that there's enough patience involved, i'd be surprised if one couldn't get good results with about any b&w film, the key being to learn how to use it. and now, having nagged a little what worked well for me was hp5 and xtol 1+1, cut developing times by 10-15% for N(at iso250), and for sunny days by 45-50% at N-2 (iso 64, meter in the sun, though sunny 16 is good enough)
good luck..
what worked well for me was hp5 and xtol 1+1, cut developing times by 10-15% for N(at iso250), and for sunny days by 45-50% at N-2 (iso 64, meter in the sun, though sunny 16 is good enough)good luck..
popstar
Well-known
I must admit I like the look of HP5+ and DD-X. While DD-X is a bit more expensive, if you're uncomforable working with dry chemicals as a newbie, the liquid DD-X might be the answer. Good luck deciding on what works for you!
NickTrop
Veteran
Tri-X and D76.
bcostin
Well-known
I got started with Arista 400 (Fomapan) and Diafine. I don't think it gets much easier than Diafine. It's very forgiving of exposure variations, you can use the same batch over and over, and it lasts forever.
goo0h
Well-known
Well, I'm definitely a novice. I've done maybe a dozen or so rolls of Neopan 1600 and Neopan 400 in XTOL. For times I pretty much just followed the massive dev chart at:
http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html
Just recently I tried my first roll of HP5+ in XTOL and it seemed to go pretty well. I like the rich, dark blacks of Neopan, but at times that contrast just runs away. Seems like HP5+ has more manageable contrast, and I processed it for EI of 800.
http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html
Just recently I tried my first roll of HP5+ in XTOL and it seemed to go pretty well. I like the rich, dark blacks of Neopan, but at times that contrast just runs away. Seems like HP5+ has more manageable contrast, and I processed it for EI of 800.