sweathog
Well-known
Neopan 1600 isn't as grainy as my scan would have you believe. Somehow, when I resized it for uploading, it decided to become supergrainy.
ISO 1600 Film
- Thread starter JeremyLangford
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 55
- Views 7K
LightWave
Member
JeremyLangford said:
No. Not the same. 1600/3200 film are designed to be pushed. If they are the same, there will not be a need to produce a separate batch. I'll encourage you to try both and find out the difference. That's the only way to get to know them.
Harry Lime
Practitioner
JeremyLangford said:
Nope, they really are faster. Not as fast as what's printed on the box, but still pretty fast.
Film -> Box speed -> True Speed
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Fuji Neopan 1600 -> 1600 asa -> circa 640 asa
Kodak Tmax 3200 -> 3200 asa -> circa 1000-1200 asa
Ilford Delta 3200 -> 3200 asa -> circa 1000-1200 asa
Neopan has the finest grain, but is high in contrast. Forget about shadow detail.
I think this film looks really great in 'near dark' situations (heavily overcast day, dusk etc.)
Kodak Tmax has the biggest grain, but nice tonality. It looks REALLY gritty and cool.
Delta 3200 has moderate grain and the best tonality. It works best between 1200 and 2000 asa. At 3200 the grain is still very good, but contrast starts to creep up. It's also the only one that is available in 120 format. Overall I think it is the best of the three.
The key is to use a developer that is designed for push processing. The most widely used are probably Kodak Xtol, Ilford DD-X, Ilford MICROPHEN and Diafine. DD-X is the easiest to find and use. It comes pre-mixed in a bottle.
You can use D76 or ID11 if that is all you have. The results won't be bad, you just won't be able to squeeze every ounce of performance out of the film stock.
Last edited:
JeremyLangford
I'd really Leica Leica
Chriscrawfordphoto said:Tmax 3200 is NOT a 400 speed film with 3200 written on the box. It's real speed is 1000, and it gives excellent results at 1600 developed in Tmax Developer.
Here's a photo shot with Tmax 3200 at 1600:
and another:
What developer did you use and how long did you develop.
I would love to get results like these when I shoot at 1600.
steamer
Well-known
Wouldn't we all.JeremyLangford said:
wintoid
Back to film
Neopan400@1600 in Diafine
traveller
Learning how to print
Delta 3200@1600 in XTOL
Archie
shooting mathematican
well Jeremy do you actually know which kind of developer you have? if you are limited to one, given from your school, then that might be the key variable.
JeremyLangford
I'd really Leica Leica
I think my class uses HC110. Is that from a certain company?
rogue_designer
Reciprocity Failure
if you use HC110 (made by kodak) - you're in luck. It's a very flexible developer.
I use tri-x and push process it with hc110 to 1600 very regularly. I personally use low dilutions and low agitation over long time periods to get grain control, and contrast control. But there are at least a dozen different ways to accomplish push processing with HC110 and TriX.
My personal time for 1600 with trix is to use it diluted 1:100 (1 part US syrup to 100 parts water), for about 50 minutes. I agitate only by inverting the tanks three times, every 5 minutes or so.
All the photos in my equinox shoot in my gallery here were shot this way. Including this one.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=59520
I use tri-x and push process it with hc110 to 1600 very regularly. I personally use low dilutions and low agitation over long time periods to get grain control, and contrast control. But there are at least a dozen different ways to accomplish push processing with HC110 and TriX.
My personal time for 1600 with trix is to use it diluted 1:100 (1 part US syrup to 100 parts water), for about 50 minutes. I agitate only by inverting the tanks three times, every 5 minutes or so.
All the photos in my equinox shoot in my gallery here were shot this way. Including this one.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=59520
sahe69
Well-known
wintoid said:
May I ask with which soaking time or temperature did you reach that (if that would matter with Diafine) ? I've never heard before that one could achieve 1600 with this combo yet the attached picture looks very good indeed!
wintoid
Back to film
sahe69 said:
Diafine isn't really particularly temperature sensitive, and there's one time for everything, so there's no information to share as such 😀 That's just the way it looks. 3 minutes in bath A, 3 in bath B, gentle agitation every minute, no stop bath, straight to fixer. Easy peasy lemon squeezy.
I found that Diafine and Neopan worked really well together. It's great with the 1600 Neopan too.
JeremyLangford
I'd really Leica Leica
dmr said:
Why is this?
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
JeremyLangford said:
Jeremy,
Tmax Developer, 1+4, 75 deg, 8.5 minutes. I agitate first 30 seconds then 5 inversions every minute.
rogue_designer
Reciprocity Failure
JeremyLangford said:
No mirror moving about inside the camera, means less camera shake internally. So slower speeds can be handheld more easily.
Kristopher
Established
Use a medium format TLR!
Use a medium format TLR!
With a TLR, you can shoot at really slow speeds witout problems.
Even if the lenses are slower, the size of the film will easly deal with grain issues so you can go up to 3200 or even more.
I usually use TXP 320 film and push it to 1280 ASA in HC-110.
If you can't get rid of grain, use a larger film it will be less apparent for the same enlargement.
Use a medium format TLR!
With a TLR, you can shoot at really slow speeds witout problems.
Even if the lenses are slower, the size of the film will easly deal with grain issues so you can go up to 3200 or even more.
I usually use TXP 320 film and push it to 1280 ASA in HC-110.
If you can't get rid of grain, use a larger film it will be less apparent for the same enlargement.
Similar threads
