GeneW
Veteran
I blame y'all for this. I used to only use Tri-X and HP5+ and Superia 800 and never even think about anything else. But reading your conversation threads has made me curious about the wide world of films I have never experienced.
I needed some fresh fixer so I took the train into Toronto today and visited one of the big photo stores. In addition to fixer, here are the films I came home with:
First a restocking of my standards:
- Tri-X 400
- Superia Xtra 800
Then the new stuff:
- Neopan 400
- Delta 400
- Delta 100
- Tmax 100
- Superia 100
- Hi Definition 400
There. That should keep me busy for the next couple of months at least. I'll be very curious to find out which ones scan the best on my Minolta 5400.
Thanks for making me curious! it's fun to undertake some new experiments.
Gene
I needed some fresh fixer so I took the train into Toronto today and visited one of the big photo stores. In addition to fixer, here are the films I came home with:
First a restocking of my standards:
- Tri-X 400
- Superia Xtra 800
Then the new stuff:
- Neopan 400
- Delta 400
- Delta 100
- Tmax 100
- Superia 100
- Hi Definition 400
There. That should keep me busy for the next couple of months at least. I'll be very curious to find out which ones scan the best on my Minolta 5400.
Thanks for making me curious! it's fun to undertake some new experiments.
Gene
Wayne R. Scott
Half fast Leica User
Gene,
If you have never used T-Max or Delta films before; be prepared for a shock when you dump out the developer for the first time. It will be a dark purple or green in color. I about passed out when I did my first roll of T-max several years ago. I thought I had done something horribly wrong, but it is just the dye coating coming off. I do a 2 minute pre-soak with water before I add developer and I fix the film for around 10 minutes instead of 4 or 5 minutes and this seems to get rid of the purple cast that the negatives have if you use shorter fixing times.
Have fun!!
Wayne
If you have never used T-Max or Delta films before; be prepared for a shock when you dump out the developer for the first time. It will be a dark purple or green in color. I about passed out when I did my first roll of T-max several years ago. I thought I had done something horribly wrong, but it is just the dye coating coming off. I do a 2 minute pre-soak with water before I add developer and I fix the film for around 10 minutes instead of 4 or 5 minutes and this seems to get rid of the purple cast that the negatives have if you use shorter fixing times.
Have fun!!
Wayne
GeneW
Veteran
Wayne,
Wow! Thanks for letting me know. I've never used any of the T-grain films before so I probably would have had fibrillations when I dumped the dev.
I had heard that TMax and the Deltas need longer fixing time. I think I also heard that the new Tri-X needs longer fixing time as well. I'll crank them all up to 10 mins to make sure they get a good fixing.
I'm really interested in how these films look when scanned compared to my usual Tri-X or HP5+
BTW, is Delta 400 a true 400? Or is it more like 320 or 200 in your experience?
Gene
Wow! Thanks for letting me know. I've never used any of the T-grain films before so I probably would have had fibrillations when I dumped the dev.
I had heard that TMax and the Deltas need longer fixing time. I think I also heard that the new Tri-X needs longer fixing time as well. I'll crank them all up to 10 mins to make sure they get a good fixing.
I'm really interested in how these films look when scanned compared to my usual Tri-X or HP5+
BTW, is Delta 400 a true 400? Or is it more like 320 or 200 in your experience?
Gene
back alley
IMAGES
i've always used it at 400 and processed normally.
what developer will you be using?
joe
what developer will you be using?
joe
GeneW
Veteran
Joe, I have HC-110 and Rodinal on hand and am comfortable with both. HC-110 is very similar to D76. Rodinal is like, well, Rodinal 
Which of these would you recommend for Delta 400?
Gene
Which of these would you recommend for Delta 400?Gene
back alley
IMAGES
i've never used either so i'm not of much help there.
i'm a lazy kind of guy and a bit stubborn to boot - so i mostly used ilfosol s developer even when not recomended. i prefer liquid chemicals when possible. i think the grain might be more noticable with the ilfosol s but i never found it objectionable.
i did start to use ddx (?) with delta 3200 and really liked that.
of course, now that i think about it, i'm talking about 120 film mostly so this might be totally useless info for you.
joe
i'm a lazy kind of guy and a bit stubborn to boot - so i mostly used ilfosol s developer even when not recomended. i prefer liquid chemicals when possible. i think the grain might be more noticable with the ilfosol s but i never found it objectionable.
i did start to use ddx (?) with delta 3200 and really liked that.
of course, now that i think about it, i'm talking about 120 film mostly so this might be totally useless info for you.
joe
R
Rich Silfver
Guest
You forgot Fuji Acros 100 - great film!
Example:
Example:
GeneW
Veteran
Acros. Well, there'll always be another trip to the camera shop
Wayne R. Scott
Half fast Leica User
Gene,
As far as rating Delta 400 at 400 or 320 or 250. I can not say what would be right in your case. I do not want to seem harsh, but really everyone must test their equipment, exposure methods, and developing methods to establish their effective E.I.(Exposure Index).
Realistically it will take 4 to 5 rolls of a given film, shot under test conditions to determine an effective E.I. and a Plus 1, Plus 2, Minus 1 and Minus 2 developing times in order to really know what a given film can do. Then after establishing these developing times and E.I. shoot some film of your subject matter and determine if you like the results. Shooting one roll of a certain film under uncontrolled lighting situations and then using a guesstimated developing time is not a fair test of film or equipment. To make judgements based on this type of test is folly, IMHO. But, then again, I am an old, biased photographer and what I say should be taken with a grain of salt as you have no idea whether I know what I am talking about or not.
I think just about any of todays films can be effective if you learn how to use them.
Wayne
As far as rating Delta 400 at 400 or 320 or 250. I can not say what would be right in your case. I do not want to seem harsh, but really everyone must test their equipment, exposure methods, and developing methods to establish their effective E.I.(Exposure Index).
Realistically it will take 4 to 5 rolls of a given film, shot under test conditions to determine an effective E.I. and a Plus 1, Plus 2, Minus 1 and Minus 2 developing times in order to really know what a given film can do. Then after establishing these developing times and E.I. shoot some film of your subject matter and determine if you like the results. Shooting one roll of a certain film under uncontrolled lighting situations and then using a guesstimated developing time is not a fair test of film or equipment. To make judgements based on this type of test is folly, IMHO. But, then again, I am an old, biased photographer and what I say should be taken with a grain of salt as you have no idea whether I know what I am talking about or not.
I think just about any of todays films can be effective if you learn how to use them.
Wayne
S
Stu :)
Guest
Gene if it's any help... being a Neopan user myself, I've discovered to my horror that Neopan likes Rodinal (1:50). Even 1600!
Good combo of sharpness and tone, several of my B+W shots in the gallery are shoot on Neopan400 and soup'd in Rodinal 1:50.
And I will second the vote for Acros...
Superia 100? Why not try Reala next time.
Stu
Good combo of sharpness and tone, several of my B+W shots in the gallery are shoot on Neopan400 and soup'd in Rodinal 1:50.
And I will second the vote for Acros...
Superia 100? Why not try Reala next time.
Stu
GeneW
Veteran
Stu - thanks for the info on your experience with Neopan and Rodinal (1:50). By coincidence, that's my fav dev setup for Tri-X. But I don't like Rodinal for HP5+ -- gets really grainy. HC-110 does a better job on that for me. I've been reading back posts on photo.net and it seems a lot of folks like Rodinal for T-Max 100 as well.
Reala 100? Oops, that's the one I meant to get but I get their names mixed up sometimes. Well at least I'll get a chance to see what Superia 100 looks like.
Wayne - I agree with everything you said, but that's not how I work for one simple reason: I'm too lazy...
I simply start at the manufacturer's stated ISO unless I hear *lots* of people say that it's rated too high. I just shoot the roll, develop normally and see how it looks. If I have sufficient shadow detail, I check contrast and either up or down my dev time. If shadow detail is too thin, I lower the ISO. That's about it -- nothing as rigorous and controlled as what you do. But in general I've had good luck with this simple method, fine tuning my results over time. I don't do any wetroom printing so enlargers are not part of my equation. My scanner is, though, and that's what I measure my results against these days.
Gene
Reala 100? Oops, that's the one I meant to get but I get their names mixed up sometimes. Well at least I'll get a chance to see what Superia 100 looks like.
Wayne - I agree with everything you said, but that's not how I work for one simple reason: I'm too lazy...
I simply start at the manufacturer's stated ISO unless I hear *lots* of people say that it's rated too high. I just shoot the roll, develop normally and see how it looks. If I have sufficient shadow detail, I check contrast and either up or down my dev time. If shadow detail is too thin, I lower the ISO. That's about it -- nothing as rigorous and controlled as what you do. But in general I've had good luck with this simple method, fine tuning my results over time. I don't do any wetroom printing so enlargers are not part of my equation. My scanner is, though, and that's what I measure my results against these days.
Gene
R
Rich Silfver
Guest
Gene, how did the film comparison go? Any conclusions? Any personal favourite?
GeneW
Veteran
The only one I've tried so far is Neopan 400, which I like very much. I've been a slow shooter lately -- haven't been out as much as I'd like. I'm working on a writing assignment with a looming deadline -- more film experimenting when that's finished.
It'll likely take me six months to go through all this film. I always shoot Tri-X or (now) Neopan 400 in my main camera so it takes awhile to use the others in my other cams.
Gene
It'll likely take me six months to go through all this film. I always shoot Tri-X or (now) Neopan 400 in my main camera so it takes awhile to use the others in my other cams.
Gene
Last edited:
T
Todd.Hanz
Guest
My takes:
I agree, Acros is a superior fine grain film, gives a very creamy look to skin that I like.
I have found that rating most film at an EI of one whole stop less than the manufacturers recomendation, ie. 200 for 400 speed film, allows me to control highlights and gives good shadow detail (though that is a personal preference).
Rodinal has become my new developer for Tri-X, the grain becomes sharper which looks better than the blurry grain I got with D-76 1:1.
Gene, I would be interested in your take on the Kodak Hi-Def. I really like it for a cheap film, and it's available in grocery stores down here.
Todd
I agree, Acros is a superior fine grain film, gives a very creamy look to skin that I like.
I have found that rating most film at an EI of one whole stop less than the manufacturers recomendation, ie. 200 for 400 speed film, allows me to control highlights and gives good shadow detail (though that is a personal preference).
Rodinal has become my new developer for Tri-X, the grain becomes sharper which looks better than the blurry grain I got with D-76 1:1.
Gene, I would be interested in your take on the Kodak Hi-Def. I really like it for a cheap film, and it's available in grocery stores down here.
Todd
GeneW
Veteran
Acros is getting serious accolades here. I must try a roll.
I generally rate film a little lower than the manufacture's rating -- e.g. 320 for Tri-X 400.
Todd, like you, I'm really liking the look of Tri-X in Rodinal 1:50. Neopan 400 looks great in R 1:50 too.
I guess this is what having multiple cameras is for -- so you can put a different kind of film in each one
Gene
I generally rate film a little lower than the manufacture's rating -- e.g. 320 for Tri-X 400.
Todd, like you, I'm really liking the look of Tri-X in Rodinal 1:50. Neopan 400 looks great in R 1:50 too.
I guess this is what having multiple cameras is for -- so you can put a different kind of film in each one
Gene
S
Stu :)
Guest
I've just tried a two rolls of Kodak High Definition. One at normal at ISO 200 and one pushed to ISO 800, with no colour correction.
Firstly this film likes being pushed. On 6x4 prints it was hard to spot the difference, it wasn't until I got the film into a Imacon film scanner and scanned the negs for A3 output size that the difference became obvious.
For colour, when compared to my preferred choice of Agfa Ultra 100 for 35mm print (neg) film, it doesn't do so well.
Ultra is garish, yes. But Ultra's colours are more neutral. With Kodak's Hi-Def, Yellows and Greens looked good. Blues where a tad washed out and Reds... Don't ask me why but Kodak film likes the Red end of the spectrum. Some of the first photos I took where at Cafe Verona, which has bright red interior... even brighter on the prints.
Stu
Firstly this film likes being pushed. On 6x4 prints it was hard to spot the difference, it wasn't until I got the film into a Imacon film scanner and scanned the negs for A3 output size that the difference became obvious.
For colour, when compared to my preferred choice of Agfa Ultra 100 for 35mm print (neg) film, it doesn't do so well.
Ultra is garish, yes. But Ultra's colours are more neutral. With Kodak's Hi-Def, Yellows and Greens looked good. Blues where a tad washed out and Reds... Don't ask me why but Kodak film likes the Red end of the spectrum. Some of the first photos I took where at Cafe Verona, which has bright red interior... even brighter on the prints.
Stu
GeneW
Veteran
Wayne, I just developed a roll of the 'new' Tri-X and it came out dark purple too. Glad I'd been forewarned about T-Max and Delta. Must be some new kind of coating that comes off during development.Wayne R. Scott said:
Gene