Favourite 400 speed B+W film?

[tedwhite]

Thanks, Mark. That may be the problem.

 

[Russ]

Neopan 400CN is not listed in the Freestyle catalog. Where do you get this film?

Ted

It's not available in th eStates. I have a buddy in the UK, that sends me bricks of it. What's your mailing address?

Russ

 

[Russ]

Neopan 400CN is not listed in the Freestyle catalog. Where do you get this film?

Ted

What's your personal E-mailing address?

Russ

 

[tedwhite]

Russ: It's tedwhite@cableone.net.

Thanks,

Ted

 

[gumanow]

I'm bulk loading so my choice is more limited. I was using FomaPan400 for some time but the lack of frame numbers and film type made me look for something else. I'm now using HP5+ almost exclusively.

For 120 my film of choice is Neopan Acros 100 though.

 

[Bruin]

Neopan 400 is my first choice - it's Fuji and $3 for a 36-exp roll at B&H, and that's good enough for me. It's cheap enough that even bulk rolling my own is not worth the savings for the hassle. Oh yeah I like the look, too

 

[Muller]

The only 400's I've been working are Kodak 400CN and HP5. I normally use 100 or 125 for the most part.

 

[okto]

Judging from what's in my work box, I have to say HP5+ based on quantity used, although I think I like Neopan better (especially the price).

 

[vieri]

- Fav is Tri-X @ 1200 in Diafine; @ 400 in HC but will soon try 510-Pyro;

I used HP5 a lot, souped in various Ilford developers and liked it very much; souped in Diafine @ 800 and liked it a lot for some light; and am going to try some Neopan 400 soon just because curiosity is a very good thing

 

[lawrence]

I have three faves:

* HP5+ rated 400-800, general purpose, the film I judge others by.
* Tri-X rated 800+, when there's not much light as pushes better than HP5+ but not as pretty when rated normally.
* Neopan 400, for portraiture under controlled lighting conditions as not much latitude but nice highlights if not over exposed. Not such a great impression of sharpness as the other two.

I am looking forward to trying the new formula TMY (Tmax 400). In some ways I liked TMY but found the grain too gritty and not enough latitude for general use.

 

[bluelight]

My stupid question,

What does it meant by shoot a C41 BW film @ 320?

Rather than over-exposing, does it mean that the processing should match ISO 320?

Will my one hour photo lab be able to do push/pull on C41?

Thanks

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

My stupid question,

What does it meant by shoot a C41 BW film @ 320?

Rather than over-exposing, does it mean that the processing should match ISO 320?

Will my one hour photo lab be able to do push/pull on C41?

Thanks

Don't pull-process, just expose at 320 and develop normal. The box says 400 but the real speed is lower on those films.

 

[Ororaro]

What is it with people about "real speed" versus box speed? I think Kodak and Fuji and the rest of the companies know what they are doing. If there was a "real speed" such as 320 Versus 400, then the DX reading would read 320. This is, IMO, all BS.

 

[Ororaro]

Besides, you have to know that many cameras don't make a difference between third stops. It's all in half stops, which makes ISO 320 really moot.
The other thing to consider is how accurate the camera's shutter is. Is 1/125 really 1/125 or 1/90? Or 1/180? Maybe you've always been shooting your film like it was ISO 640 altough you rated it at 320. Do you realize this?

Also, in regards to silver BW films, they react differently to each and every developer. So it's not about "true speed" but more of a true developing time. This is why it's important to follow the specifications.

With this being said, I recommend people to always expose at box speed and to forget the "true speed" bs.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

What is it with people about "real speed" versus box speed? I think Kodak and Fuji and the rest of the companies know what they are doing. If there was a "real speed" such as 320 Versus 400, then the DX reading would read 320. This is, IMO, all BS.

It isn't BS unless you're too lazy to test things and don't care about quality in your work. The companies have a number of methods used to determine speed that often don't correspond to real-world use of the materials. Like many things in todays world the film speeds on the boxes are often hype and falsehood designed to sell product. Regular black and white films also vary in speed depending on developer used. Tmax 100, for example, is a 100 speed film, like Kodak says, in Tmax Developer or D76, but is only a 50 speed film in Rodinal. Of course that doesn't apply to C41 process films, as they're given standardized processing and shpuld be identical no matter what brand of chemistry is used or what lab does the processing if you take it to a lab.

 

[Ororaro]

Yeah, hm. So tell me, how did you test all the films out there? Spectrometer, densitometer or just with your eye or scanner?
Did you really test all the developers yourself or you're just repeating what you read around the net? And when you say TMAX 100 is 50 Iso in rodinal, have you tested it? Did you use Agfa's recommended development times?
And what about your development? Are you sure your thermometer isn't 1/2 a degree off?
And when you develop for 6:15 minutes, do you start counting when the films are fully immerged? And when do you stop counting? When you last hit or when you emptied the developer to the last drop?
And what camera are you using? Is the meter 100% accurate? Have you tested it with proper tools or just with your vision and eye?

No, really, at least 1/3 (i'd venture to say half) of a stop is always won or lost during shooting and development.

You can say what you want but stating authoritatively that a given film is really iso 320 instead of 400 is rubbish.

Just take my case: I shot apx-400 all summer 2007. I rated it 400 and developed it in HC110 and D76 with recommended times and all came out great. All I can say is I'm extremely glad I didn't follow internet people's "recommendations" to rate it at 200 and develop regularly. That would have been a mess. Thank God.

It isn't BS unless you're too lazy to test things and don't care about quality in your work. The companies have a number of methods used to determine speed that often don't correspond to real-world use of the materials. Like many things in todays world the film speeds on the boxes are often hype and falsehood designed to sell product. Regular black and white films also vary in speed depending on developer used. Tmax 100, for example, is a 100 speed film, like Kodak says, in Tmax Developer or D76, but is only a 50 speed film in Rodinal. Of course that doesn't apply to C41 process films, as they're given standardized processing and shpuld be identical no matter what brand of chemistry is used or what lab does the processing if you take it to a lab.

 

[Ororaro]

Maybe I don't care for quality in my work. But I have to ask you how you test your films. What are your methods?

Anyway, I'm sure you will not answer to this. I checked your galleries and I saw many images that we're either over or underdeveloped (determined by the contrast) and even some with exposure problems.

Of course, like you said, I'm maybe not after quality in my work, but you are certainly not after a good grayscale range in your work. Maybe your testing methods? Highlights with lost detail: Hello overexposure?

 

[Ororaro]

The link is clearly hosted on your site. Besides, I was clear it was your badly exposed picture I was talking about.
Yeah, you read right: Your badly exposed photo.

So please refrain giving courses to people on the internet about stuff you don't have a clue. And I did respect your copyright.
And I am not a thief. Your self portrait with white sox is about the last thing I want to own.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Yeah, hm. So tell me, how did you test all the films out there? Spectrometer, densitometer or just with your eye or scanner?
Did you really test all the developers yourself or you're just repeating what you read around the net? And when you say TMAX 100 is 50 Iso in rodinal, have you tested it? Did you use Agfa's recommended development times?
And what about your development? Are you sure your thermometer isn't 1/2 a degree off?
And when you develop for 6:15 minutes, do you start counting when the films are fully immerged? And when do you stop counting? When you last hit or when you emptied the developer to the last drop?
And what camera are you using? Is the meter 100% accurate? Have you tested it with proper tools or just with your vision and eye?

No, really, at least 1/3 (i'd venture to say half) of a stop is always won or lost during shooting and development.

You can say what you want but stating authoritatively that a given film is really iso 320 instead of 400 is rubbish.

Just take my case: I shot apx-400 all summer 2007. I rated it 400 and developed it in HC110 and D76 with recommended times and all came out great. All I can say is I'm extremely glad I didn't follow internet people's "recommendations" to rate it at 200 and develop regularly. That would have been a mess. Thank God.

I tested with a densitometer, and both of my handheld meters and all three of my 35mm SLRs match within 1/10 stop. Yes, I paid to have them calibrated that way. As far as you thinking my work has 'poor greyscale', well that's your opinion, nothing more. If they have blown highlights or dark shadows it is for a reason...I'm the artist who created them, not you. I don't expect you to understand, your history of belligerent, nasty, meanspirited posts shows what you're all about.

I used tmax 100 in Rodinal for years, I am very familiar with the properties of that film and developer. By the way, AGFA's data sheets showed an EI of 64 with that combination, only 1/3 stop off what I prefer. Not 100. Not the box speed. Get it?

 

[Ororaro]

Man, you're weird.