robbeiflex
Well-known
Hi All,
I have read many posts recently on one camera, one lens, one year, and know its not for me. However, the suggestion of one film and one developer sounds like a good idea since I would like to improve my developing and need to bulk order online to get specific films and chemicals at reasonable prices.
I've settled on xtol as my developer because I like its look, price and flexibility. I haven't tried it yet but I've used ID-11 which is also powder and has similar fine grain.
I've looked at lower priced films like apx and foma, but then if I run out I may not be able to stop by the local shop for a roll. As a result I was thinking of ditching my usual Ilfords for one year in favour of tmax since I've had great results with it and it is cheaper online.
Now to ask for some opinions. I usually shoot in a range of ISO 100 to 800 and usually want to keep the grain fine for scanning. I'm more willing to give up the 100 than the 800 in case of limitations because I shoot a lot of low light no flash. Should I go for the TMX or TMY? If I went for APX or Foma, would I go for the 100 speed or the 400? I guess in the end my key question is what qualities/look does a 100 pushed to 800 in XTOL have, versus pulling a 400 to 100 which is a stop more pulling than recommended.
Any advice and experience is greatly appreciated.
Thanks'
Rob
I have read many posts recently on one camera, one lens, one year, and know its not for me. However, the suggestion of one film and one developer sounds like a good idea since I would like to improve my developing and need to bulk order online to get specific films and chemicals at reasonable prices.
I've settled on xtol as my developer because I like its look, price and flexibility. I haven't tried it yet but I've used ID-11 which is also powder and has similar fine grain.
I've looked at lower priced films like apx and foma, but then if I run out I may not be able to stop by the local shop for a roll. As a result I was thinking of ditching my usual Ilfords for one year in favour of tmax since I've had great results with it and it is cheaper online.
Now to ask for some opinions. I usually shoot in a range of ISO 100 to 800 and usually want to keep the grain fine for scanning. I'm more willing to give up the 100 than the 800 in case of limitations because I shoot a lot of low light no flash. Should I go for the TMX or TMY? If I went for APX or Foma, would I go for the 100 speed or the 400? I guess in the end my key question is what qualities/look does a 100 pushed to 800 in XTOL have, versus pulling a 400 to 100 which is a stop more pulling than recommended.
Any advice and experience is greatly appreciated.
Thanks'
Rob
Last edited:
scottyb70
Well-known
I really like TMAX 400. Going to be trying it in caffenol.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
100 > 800 will give awful results for most subjects, regardless of the film you choose.
Why do you want 400>100? Overexposure = bigger grain and less sharpness, and underdevelopment usually = lousy tonality.
Also, you're abandoning the film you normally use and switching to a developer you've never used. This is rash enough at any time, but deciding to do it for a year, sight unseen, smacks more of swallowing the 'one film, one dev' fantasy than of trying to get better pics.
Cheers,
R.
Why do you want 400>100? Overexposure = bigger grain and less sharpness, and underdevelopment usually = lousy tonality.
Also, you're abandoning the film you normally use and switching to a developer you've never used. This is rash enough at any time, but deciding to do it for a year, sight unseen, smacks more of swallowing the 'one film, one dev' fantasy than of trying to get better pics.
Cheers,
R.
Austerby
Well-known
I don't understand the single film constraint: use one developer but allowing yourself the luxury of two films would surely double the knowledge you'd gain whilst giving you the flexibility and quality desired over a wider range of photograph conditions.
robklurfield
eclipse
How about one year, one frame?
robbeiflex
Well-known
To be honest the one year part is really quite arbitrary. I plan to stock up, so at my rate of around 1 roll per week it could be a few months, it could be over a year. If I find a combination I like, I'll stick to it.
To Rogers points, yes 100 pushed to 800 is my fear and thanks for the input. As for fantasy, I woud disagree and say its more consistency, availability (or lack of), and economy. I have enough by way of constraints at work and home that I won't be dogmatic abouth this.
Thanks;
Rob
To Rogers points, yes 100 pushed to 800 is my fear and thanks for the input. As for fantasy, I woud disagree and say its more consistency, availability (or lack of), and economy. I have enough by way of constraints at work and home that I won't be dogmatic abouth this.
Thanks;
Rob
robbeiflex
Well-known
Austerby, in my experience the HP5 and FP4 were quite different in LC29. It's nice to have the flexibility, but if I were to go with both TMX and TMY would they be similar? I've used TMY a few times but TMX not so much and in different developer.
Thanks,
Rob
Thanks,
Rob
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Too much distance between 100 and 800 to do it with one film. Either go with two different ISO films or just shoot everything with 400 speed film. You might be surprised just how flexible ISO 400 really is.
raytoei@gmail.com
Veteran
robbeiflex,
cool idea. i am currently exploring the various ultrafine films (apx, t-grain, plus. non-plus, new c-41 etc) with Excel (an xtol work alike). But I too have been toying with the idea of a fine grain film & a push film.
The Aristan Premium 100 and 400 (Plus-x and Tri-x ) seem to complement well, as I push Plus-x to 800 without issues, and Tri-x to 1600 as well. The reason for 02 films is because plus x pushed to 800 still looks finer than tri-x pushed to 800.
As for developer, I am undecided whether to go with Diafine or Xtol or both.
cheers!
cool idea. i am currently exploring the various ultrafine films (apx, t-grain, plus. non-plus, new c-41 etc) with Excel (an xtol work alike). But I too have been toying with the idea of a fine grain film & a push film.
The Aristan Premium 100 and 400 (Plus-x and Tri-x ) seem to complement well, as I push Plus-x to 800 without issues, and Tri-x to 1600 as well. The reason for 02 films is because plus x pushed to 800 still looks finer than tri-x pushed to 800.
As for developer, I am undecided whether to go with Diafine or Xtol or both.
cheers!
mfogiel
Veteran
I would suggest to use Tri X for the 200-800 ISO range and Plus X or Rollei Retro 100 for the 100 ISO. I am not a fan of Xtol, which for me delivers very flat tonality, DD X or D 76 would be much better. Keep it in mind, that Arista Premium 400 and 100 are Tri X and Plus X at half the price, why not order some bricks from freestyle, you will save a lot.
Actually, if you scan, then you can really simplify to the bone, by shooting Tri X between ISO 100 and 1600 and developing in Diafine, this way you will even use the same 2 bottles of dilute developer for the whole year, no need to prepare new every time.
Tri X in Diafine
@ ISO 100
@ ISO 200
@ ISO 400
@ ISO 800
@ ISO 1600
@ ISO 3200
Actually, if you scan, then you can really simplify to the bone, by shooting Tri X between ISO 100 and 1600 and developing in Diafine, this way you will even use the same 2 bottles of dilute developer for the whole year, no need to prepare new every time.
Tri X in Diafine
@ ISO 100
@ ISO 200
@ ISO 400
@ ISO 800
@ ISO 1600
@ ISO 3200
Last edited:
Ljós
Well-known
There is something to be said for using just one film for everything, especially if one is not a professional (where one's work or the clients demand the last smidgens of possible quality) but an amateur who wants to simplify things.
When I finally got my second M2, I did it with the intention to finally be able to have 400 speed film in one body and 100 speed in the other - both black and white. But in practice I found a different method: 400 speed film all the way, one body for normal/pull development, one for low light/flat light, to be developed to a higher contrast. (Possibly when bright summer months come again, there will be room for 100 speed - but not now.)
There is always a supply of just one film that I take with me, simplifies logistics. I am using TMY2 at the moment, and the quality is very close to 100 speed films of a few years ago. In sunlight, on goes the yellow filter, shaving a bit off the speed.
When I finally got my second M2, I did it with the intention to finally be able to have 400 speed film in one body and 100 speed in the other - both black and white. But in practice I found a different method: 400 speed film all the way, one body for normal/pull development, one for low light/flat light, to be developed to a higher contrast. (Possibly when bright summer months come again, there will be room for 100 speed - but not now.)
There is always a supply of just one film that I take with me, simplifies logistics. I am using TMY2 at the moment, and the quality is very close to 100 speed films of a few years ago. In sunlight, on goes the yellow filter, shaving a bit off the speed.
JPSuisse
Well-known
Hi there
I wouldn't do this either. 100 - 800 is really too big.
In your shoes, I'd use Neopan for between 400 - 1600, and then something like Plus X, for 100 - 200.
But then of course this is just an opinion.
Kind regards,
John
I wouldn't do this either. 100 - 800 is really too big.
In your shoes, I'd use Neopan for between 400 - 1600, and then something like Plus X, for 100 - 200.
But then of course this is just an opinion.
Kind regards,
John
kdemas
Enjoy Life.
filmfan
Well-known
Why the one year assignment? Why not just do one film and one developer until you have improved your developing and have the hang of it?
How do you know it will take exactly one year for this to happen?
How do you know it will take exactly one year for this to happen?
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
Bottom line is that if you're going to shoot one film it has to be an ISO400 emulsion, unless you want to use a tripod whenever things get dark.
That leaves you with a few options, all superb.
Tri-X/Arista
TMAX400 generation 2 (2TMY)
HP5+
Delta 400
Neopan 400
Any good photographer should be able to get good results out of any of these films, IMO. They are not all the same, but all are excellent emulsions.
Right now I have stocks of 2TMY and Neopan 400 in my freezer. I prefer 2TMY. The Neopan is there because it was cheap (purchased as Legacy Pro). Since Legacy Pro is going away, and Neopan is neither cheap nor available in bulk spools, when I'm done with my current stock I probably won't get any more. Going forward I will follow the following guidelines: (1) support Kodak and Ilford. (2) Standardize on films that can be purchased in bulk. If I were to shoot only one film it would be either 2TMY or HP5+.
2TMY can do everything, but it is more demanding of tight process control than Tri-X or HP5+. Neopan 400 occupies a space between 2TMY and the others. I have not used Delta extensively.
When I got my M6, for a long time I shot transparency film only, to force myself to expose carefully and to learn how the M6's meter responds in different situations. 2TMY is a bit like that. It requires more care than Tri-X or HP5+. But 2TMY also has considerably tighter grain and it's more responsive to development changes (i.e., its strength is also its weakness). Note that the original TMY was still more unforgiving (click here for details) than 2TMY, more so than I wanted to deal with. 2TMY is less demanding but still requires care. Over-develop and you'll blow your highlights (ergo, don't over-develop!). The up-sides are that: (1) it has grain that approaches some of the old 100 speed emulsions, with good acutence, and (2) it pushes really well. Roger and Frances wrote a useful review of 2TMY when it was released.
RFF poster Freakscene makes the case for XTOL and I agree with him. I see little reason to use anything else. D-76 and DD-X are just fine, too. Times and dilutions can be varied with ANY of these developers to give a lot more variation in the developed negs than between say D76 and XTOL. I used D-76 for many years. More recently, I've been consistently happy with XTOL using 2TMY, HP5+ and Neopan 400, 1600, and ACROS. DD-X is very convenient because it's a liquid stock, which can be nice.
If you are methodical about development and experiment with times and dilutions, and standardize on any of the above films, and any of the above developers, you should be able to get terrific results.
That leaves you with a few options, all superb.
Tri-X/Arista
TMAX400 generation 2 (2TMY)
HP5+
Delta 400
Neopan 400
Any good photographer should be able to get good results out of any of these films, IMO. They are not all the same, but all are excellent emulsions.
Right now I have stocks of 2TMY and Neopan 400 in my freezer. I prefer 2TMY. The Neopan is there because it was cheap (purchased as Legacy Pro). Since Legacy Pro is going away, and Neopan is neither cheap nor available in bulk spools, when I'm done with my current stock I probably won't get any more. Going forward I will follow the following guidelines: (1) support Kodak and Ilford. (2) Standardize on films that can be purchased in bulk. If I were to shoot only one film it would be either 2TMY or HP5+.
2TMY can do everything, but it is more demanding of tight process control than Tri-X or HP5+. Neopan 400 occupies a space between 2TMY and the others. I have not used Delta extensively.
When I got my M6, for a long time I shot transparency film only, to force myself to expose carefully and to learn how the M6's meter responds in different situations. 2TMY is a bit like that. It requires more care than Tri-X or HP5+. But 2TMY also has considerably tighter grain and it's more responsive to development changes (i.e., its strength is also its weakness). Note that the original TMY was still more unforgiving (click here for details) than 2TMY, more so than I wanted to deal with. 2TMY is less demanding but still requires care. Over-develop and you'll blow your highlights (ergo, don't over-develop!). The up-sides are that: (1) it has grain that approaches some of the old 100 speed emulsions, with good acutence, and (2) it pushes really well. Roger and Frances wrote a useful review of 2TMY when it was released.
RFF poster Freakscene makes the case for XTOL and I agree with him. I see little reason to use anything else. D-76 and DD-X are just fine, too. Times and dilutions can be varied with ANY of these developers to give a lot more variation in the developed negs than between say D76 and XTOL. I used D-76 for many years. More recently, I've been consistently happy with XTOL using 2TMY, HP5+ and Neopan 400, 1600, and ACROS. DD-X is very convenient because it's a liquid stock, which can be nice.
If you are methodical about development and experiment with times and dilutions, and standardize on any of the above films, and any of the above developers, you should be able to get terrific results.
Last edited:
robbeiflex
Well-known
Hi filmfan, it's not even close to being an assignment, that's for my work which has nothing to do with photography.
It's not an exact measure of time either, I just plan to order a lot so that i don't pay multiple times for shipping. It may be enough to last a year, but if I am able to travel more than currently planned it may only last me six months. It sure caught your attention though, didn't it.
Thanks everyone for your comments, and thanks especially to mfogiel for the examples. I currently lean towards XTOL and 2TMY for the majority, but after seeing mfogiel's post on Tri-X in Diafine I want to look into the price and availability of those first. I'm also open to keeping a couple of rolls of TMX, FP4 or PanF around for the few days I want to shoot at ISO 50 or 100, but those days are few and far between.
Next time I will call my thread "One developer, one or more films (some digital here and there), one long period of time!", but without the question mark.
Thanks,
Rob
robbeiflex
Well-known
I envy those who have such choice available at reasonable prices, something we give up for other benefits in a small city such as ours. If I had more time for photography maybe I would order a huge variety and try them all. Then again, maybe I'll do that anyway once I've improved my technique in some months or years. For now my priority is to improve my technique and understanding of development, and to me it makes sense to simplify (i.e. remove some variables I haven't mastered yet) as part of this process.
Cheers,
Rob
marcr1230
Well-known
Since Diafine is a fixed time per roll no matter what the EI - I can mix and match on the same roll - kind of like changing the ISO on a DSLR
robbeiflex
Well-known
Good point Fireboy, I already have 3 and 6 stop ND filters and have done exactly that when I end up with an unfinished roll of higher ISO than I would want. Why didn't I think of that? :bang: Thanks for reminding me!
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
Four suggestions:
1. Mix your XTOL stock solution in distilled water.
2. Invest in a good thermometer.
3. Consistent with Kodak recommendations, I get good results exposing 2TMY at 400 or 800 with identical development times in XTOL.
4. Bulk loading of 2TMY is about half as expensive as buying rolls.
Last edited: