Playing with film: advice please

[dogbunny]

So, I've been taking photos for about a year now and recently I've started experimenting with different films. Nothing scientific. I usually just walk into the camera shop and pull something out of the cooler that I haven't used before and plop a couple rolls down on the counter.

So far I've played with a lot of fast film and different types of color film. But this visit to the shop I picked up a couple of rolls of Ilford PANF 50. I've never used something this slow before, so I wanted to get some advice first. Any advice would be great. What does this film do best? What situations? I understand that lighting would be important, but beyond that I'm pretty clueless.

Any advice would be great.

Thanks

 

[Frank Granovski]

Ilford PANF 50 is okay. I like Ilford's HP5+ a lot better---not just with its higher speed, but with its ability to forgive and its rich resolution and saturation. HP5+ is my favourite B&W film. If you haven't tried it yet, try it.

 

[bigdog]

I find it to be pretty contrasty film so I would shoot it on a day that is not a bright sunlit day... so that being said, you may need a tripod for such a slow film. It is virtually grainless so it allows for big enlargements. I have had inconsistent results but I have gotten some stunning shots with this film including some still portraits that just look great.

 

[Poptart]

It's very good for several purposes. Landscape and nature photography in which you're interested in best possible sharpness and resolution of fine detail. Studio still life photography with strobe or tungsten lights. And the kind of "mysterious blurred" imagery of photgraphers like Meatyard suits slow films really well. (Although I wish for Agrfa25 again.)

 

[hoot]

Poptart - Meatyard is one of my favorite photographers. What do you think of Arthur Tress's early work; specifically, his Dream Collector series?

Dogbunny - Here (click) is a self-portrait I took on PAN F Plus in the spring of 2004, using on-camera flash. The scene was strongly backlit and I wanted to preserve the natural lighting while slightly brightening up the foreground so it wouldn't become a silhouette. Exposure time was quite short; probably no slower than 1/60; possibly much faster.

 

[pvdhaar]

You can look at slow films in two ways, it's like with a glass that's either half full or half empty:

1. They require slow shutter speeds; glass is half empty.. :-(
2. They allow slow shutter speeds; glass is half full 🙂

So, I'd slap the cam on a tripod, select f16/f22 and go looing for ways to capture motion...

 

[ClaremontPhoto]

Pan F... flash... preserve natural lighting... exposure time 1/60...

I love some guys' techniques. I really do.

This setup would have never ocurred to me in a thousand years.

 

[wintoid]

Here's a shot of my Hexar taken with PanF Plus.

http://static.flickr.com/31/47799173_3dbe073070_b.jpg

I find it's very good for accentuating texture.

 

[RichardS]

I noticed that most referred to the film as a slow speed film. It wasn't all that long ago that a 50 speed film was the most used speed. There were still slower films but using a film with a speed of faster than 50 meant lots of grain.

Dick

 

[hoot]

Here's a shot of my Hexar taken with PanF Plus.

Gawd... all that's missing is the bearskin rug.

 

[thpook]

PanF and FP4 were my two favorite films to use in sheet size. There really isn't that much of a difference between PanF and FP4 as far a grain goes. PanF is a little lees grainy, but where it shines is in tonality. I still use PanF in my Hexar AF, but that's really the only camera that I use it in, and with the short days we have right now, it's been sitting in the closet.

Personally, I just use FP4+ as my normal daylight film.

 

[CleverName]

Here's a shot with PanF 50. I couldn't find the negative, this is a scan of a print I made. It was greatly enlarged, this represents less than half the frame, and you still can't see any grain on an 8x10 print. I call it my "Creamy" style film, as opposed to the "Chunky" 3200 I usually shoot. Great for details.
Taken handheld with a Yashica GSN.

 

[Poptart]

Tress is sort of the gay Meatyard. Both are interesting. I did an "Homage to Metyard" series once; I don't know whether I have scans of any of them.

 

[hoot]

Nice photo, CleverName.

Poptart, if you could dig up those photos of yours, I'd be quite eager to see them.

 

[Nick R.]

In my experience, PanF+ goes best with diafine shot at its rated speed of 50. However, that's in 120 roll size. Here's a sample:

 

[dkapp]

I've just started experimenting w/ PanF the past few days. One think I found a lot of it for a good deal. I like the high contrast and slow shutter speeds from it. I'm playing with it at ISO 25 & 50. I may try pulling it another stop slower, but not sure yet. ISO 25 looks really good.

Here are some shots that I've got from my previous runs.
http://www.lifekapptured.com/analog/index.php?x=browse&category=22

I think the telephone shot shows the great contrast and zero grain of the film.
http://www.lifekapptured.com/analog/index.php?showimage=22

The street crsossing show the slow shutter speeds I've been playing with. They are both handheld, but next trip will be with my tripod too.
http://www.lifekapptured.com/analog/index.php?showimage=151
http://www.lifekapptured.com/analog/index.php?showimage=156

So far I really like the film, and I've got a lot of idea for it. These have all been developed in D76 1:1 dilution 8 min.

 

[dogbunny]

Thanks for the advice enveryone. One thing is for sure: I like texture. I understand the purpose of "pushing film", but what is the advantage to slowing an already slow film? Maybe there is an obvious answer, but like I said above, I'm still fairly new to this.

I really like the feel of the pics posted above.

thanks again