Fine Grain Film/Developer

Another thought is FP4 souped in Diafine. That gives EI=250, not quite up to 400, but equal to the EI I use for Ilford XP2. I don't have any samples scanned to show, unfortunately, but it's a very nice combination. And Diafine is amazingly convenient and easy to use.
 
Here is one shot on Ilford HP-5 developed with Ilford equivalent of D-76 the name escapes me right now.

i think it's 'id11'
 
Re: Fine Grain Film/Developer

Todd.Hanz said:
I would be interested in knowing which film everyone suggests that would have a tighter grain structure compared to Tri-X. I am looking for examples (pics) or experiences with different developer/film combos. I know alot of members use HP 5 and would be interested in your thoughts as well as C-41 process films. My only caveat is I would like it to be a 400 speed film with an "available"developer.
I use Acros 100 when I can but that isn't always an option. I feel like I can control the tonal range of Tri-X pretty well, I am just thinking about other possibilities. here is a recent example: (scanned on a flatbed, which is another issue altogether)
Click to expand...

Todd

About 5 years ago, I discovered the wonderful Fuji Neopan 400 film. Much nicer, tighter grain and tonality than Tri-X or HP-5. It's all I use now. Fantastic stuff, and cheaper too. I burn it @ 320, through a deep yellow (#15) filter for my street shooting.

Russ
 
"Back in the Day" I used to shoot nothing but Panatomic-X developed in Microdol-X. Well, the latter is still around...

Kodak Microdol-X Data Sheet

I also used it on the Tri-X shot on occasion, and got good results. Anyone use this combo anymore?
 
Brian Sweeney said:
"Back in the Day" I used to shoot nothing but Panatomic-X developed in Microdol-X. Well, the latter is still around...

Kodak Microdol-X Data Sheet

I also used it on the Tri-X shot on occasion, and got good results. Anyone use this combo anymore?
Click to expand...
That brings back some memories! I was a Pan-X fan back then -- used to bulk load it. I got some really nice results with Tri-X in Microdol-X 1:3 rating the film at 200. Very smooth grain but perhaps not quite as crisp as D76 or Rodinal.
 
Yeah, the Panatomic-X, was great. They discontinued it when they came out with T-Max 100. I prefer the Delta's over the T-Max line. But man, the negs and prints from the Neopan 400, are so beautiful! The Neopan, is not a Tabular style film. It's the old style emulsion. Perhaps that helps in achieving it wonderful tonality.

Russ
 
Brian,

I have been playing with Microdol-X with 35mm HP-5+ and 120 T-Max 100. I'll see about scanning some of the HP-5+ negs so Todd can see (sorta) what the images look like.

I am not sure what every one means by T-Max being hard to work with. I must be pretty slow.

Wayne
 
backalley photo said:
i much prefer the delta films over t-max.
t-max always seemed more 'harsh' to me and way harder to control.

joe
Click to expand...

Joe

I agree completely. The T-Max films are too finicky. The Delta's are so much easier to work with, plus, I prefer their tonal scale.

Russ
 
Here are a couple of HP-5+ 35mm shots that were developed in Microdol-X. HP-5+ was rated at ISO 400 for what it is worth. I don't know how to post 2 photos in the same post , so these will be in seperate posts, sorry.

Wayne
 
Wayne, Beautiful Portraits.

Unless "very poor" refers to finances AND NOT photographic skill, I think a name change is necessary to protect the egos of the rest of us!
 
Nice tonal range, that looks like a good film/developer combo.

Todd
 
Brian Sweeney said:
Wayne, Beautiful Portraits.

Unless "very poor" refers to finances AND NOT photographic skill, I think a name change is necessary to protect the egos of the rest of us!
Click to expand...

Aw, Shucks Brian. It warnt nuthing special. Yes, I do feel the cruel pinch of financial want. So many cameras and so little room and so little money.

Wayne
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom