Colour or black and white?

[Solinar]

Oh yeah, I don't enjoy doing my own developing, but I get better quality negs and they don't get scratched by a machine.

 

[Mike Richards]

Ready
Fire
Aim

 

[Nick R.]

For me, shooting traditional B&W, developing in diafine, and scanning the negs is fast, easy, and cheap (minus the cost of the scanner). It beats sending color film out and paying for prints I don't want.
If, on the other hand, you wish to shoot color and use B&W as just another filter in photoshop, and you can do it successfully, well, more power to ya.

 

[Rick Waldroup]

I have been shooting B&W since 1970. I still shoot B&W film today. I can usually tell when a photo has been converted from color to B&W with photoshop. It does not have the same tonality and especially it does not have the same contrast or "pop" that the film has. This is to take nothing away from digital shooters or guys who scan and then process in the computer. It is just a different means to the same end. I have my own darkroom in a really large converted workshop and I process all my own film and make my own prints and I will probably continue to do so for many years to come. I carry 2 cameras, one loaded with B&W and the other with slide film. 80% of what I shoot is in B&W but every now and then, I come across something that just needs to be shot in color.

 

[pukupi]

As I suspected, there is some merit to shooting black and white film so another question:

I am often shooting in very low light and have been using Fuji NPZ and I'm wondering what is the best alternative to this in black and white film?

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I have been using Kodak's C41 process black and white film, simply for lack of time. I will be like Pherdi, and swear I will mix up the D76 and shoot some Tri-x and Plus-X that I have stashed away.

In my Opinion, the Kodak C41 B&W has too much contrast compared with "traditional" films. When used with my "lower Contrast" Classical Glass, it seems to balance out.

Kodak Retina Reflex-S with Schneider Xenon 50mm F1.9, wide-open. This is the SAME lens that fits the Retina IIIS. The two cameras are Fraternal Twins.

BTW: I am letting Nikki use MY scented markers.

 

[Kris]

I am often shooting in very low light and have been using Fuji NPZ and I'm wondering what is the best alternative to this in black and white film?

Delta 3200 maybe? Shoot it at ISO1600 but don't pull process. If you want ISO3200 colour, Provia 400F and Sensia 400 can deliver acceptable results at ISO3200. Don't expect to use the slides for projection though.

 

[Doug]

I am often shooting in very low light and have been using Fuji NPZ and I'm wondering what is the best alternative to this in black and white film?

I use a lot of NPZ also, rating it at EI 500. For B&W I usually shoot Ilford XP2. For a higher speed B&W I think it's hard to beat Tri-X at 1200 in Diafine. So easy to use, and the results are excellent.

 

[Socke]

Delta 3200 maybe? Shoot it at ISO1600 but don't pull process.

Do you mean developing for ISO3200?

I haven't used Delta 3200 for some time and it would be the first time I develop that stuff myself.

I have two rolls waiting for an oportunity in my fridge

 

[Solinar]

Delta 3200 is more in the neighborhood of ISO 1250 - Prints well on #3 paper or with a #3 filter with variable contrast paper.

In regards to using C41 film for B&W, are you folks sold on it, because you can then turn on the Digital ICE function of the scanner?

Let me modify my previous statement regarding developing film. I've gotten in the habit of developing three rolls at once, which cuts my film developing time down signifcantly. The downside to this is you have to shoot the three rolls of the same film at the same EI and sometimes it takes more than a few weeks to get the first roll of film developed.

 

[Solinar]

PS - Delta 3200 and Ilford DDX are good match.

 

[Doug]

Hi Andrew-- I started using Ilford chromogenic B&W when it was XP1 more than 20 years ago. I stayed with it because I like the smooth creamy look it gives. I like to try other chromogenics as they become available too, but I tend to prefer the ones without orange mask, since those are easier to print in the wet darkroom.

I didn't dream then that we'd now be scanning negatives routinely, and so the chromogenic's advantages in that respect are just ICEing on the cake for me! 🙂

And there's really no reason not to develop C41 at home as we do traditional B&W films. Ilford used to offer development kits for XP1 in various sizes. There's an unused 84-oz XP1 kit in my darkroom now. And I've used the Unicolor C41 kit too...

The only tricky part is maintaining an accurate 100°F and dealing with the short developer time of 3.75 min. Ilford's kit is not quite standard C41, and as I recall recommended development was 5 min or so. There's a development expert with commercial experience (Rowland Mowrey) on Photo.net who's been experimenting with lower temps and longer times, which would make home-C41 more convenient.

Of course any film intended for C41 process, color or B&W, can be developed in the same tank with any other. And likewise with Diafine, any variety of traditional B&W films can be souped together too... one of the reasons I like it!

 

[digitalox]

I think that for B&W you still can't go wrong with the traditional darkroom. It is cheaper in the startup to produce great quality prints.

A good scanner, printer, and computer costs a lot more than an enlarger and chemicals. Then you have to learn photoshop (or other) and calibrate the printer to your screen so you get the exact colors you see on the screen. Just as much time invested as learning/experimenting in the darkroom takes.

When the prices go down more and the quality goes up I may move to digital anyway just to avoid the exposure to all the chemicals, which is the only real downside IMO.

For high speed b&w, delta 3200 has been mentioned and is good, there's also tmz 3200, and tri-x pushes easily to 800 and somewhat beyond depending on the developer.

 

[TNRL]

no doubt, i would have made it b/w.

 

[ClaremontPhoto]

Almost all my work is color either straight C41 or E6 xpro in C41 chemicals. It's just the way I generally see stuff.

Very rarely I'll use Fuji C41 B&W film.

Everything goes to the minilab for dev and CD only. Then I minimally photoshop it, no more than crop out a distractor or straighten a horizon.

I never convert color to B&W onscreen.