Which B&W film - if I'm not processing?

S

st3ph3nm

Guest
Hi guys,

I don't have the space or skills to do my own darkroom stuff as yet (though I'm planning to do a course next year some time). In the meantime, I've been using Kodak c41 b&w film with some success. I've found a good place to get it developed (they actually re-set their machines so I don't get green photos - unlike most places) and I've found that they'll also develop & print "normal" b&w.

Now, I know that processing yourself gives you a whole lot of control over the final outcome, so I'm wondering, do you guys think I can benefit from trying out some different films even though the same people will be developing it - rather than myself.

I hope this question makes sense. If not, happy to rabbit on for another three paragraphs to try to muddy things more. :)

So, in a nutshell, which b&w do you like, keeping in mind I won't be doing the printing myself.

cheers,
Steve
 
are you talking about only c41 films?

these are ok w/ the 1 hour machines, quality and price are good if the lab is good.
regular b&w films, in my experience, are expensive to have processed by a lab and they need to be a good lab cause they can mess up your film and prints easily.

joe
 
I personally like Kodak T400CN (or the new BW400CN) but I find that it needs to be exposed at ISO200.

If you want the final result shown on monitor only, no prints, I find shooting ISO100 colour slide then later desaturating it gives more pleasing results when it comes to skin tones: smoother grain and better (less) contrast.
 
backalley photo said:
are you talking about only c41 films?

these are ok w/ the 1 hour machines, quality and price are good if the lab is good.
regular b&w films, in my experience, are expensive to have processed by a lab and they need to be a good lab cause they can mess up your film and prints easily.

joe
Click to expand...

Hi Joe,

No, I meant regular b&w. I haven't checked out price, yet. But it seems to me that regular b&w seems "deeper" in it's tonal range, somehow. But can I get that if someone else is doing it, or is all in the printing?

Cheers,
Steve
 
Kris, how do you go about digitising the colour slide?

Do you get it developed and mounted, or do you just get a CD made up?

Cheers,
Steve
 
Steve, lab processing silver halide B&W is very expensive because the demand is very low and it is done manually. Nowadays, only when I need to use film that's not available in C-41 or E6 then I go for true B&W e.g. need to use ISO1600.

Just for comparison, I process my films at Vanbar in Carlton. All prices here for development cost only and I get uncut rolls.

- E6 processing $8/roll or $11/roll for push/pull processing - 3hrs turn around time.

- C-41 $6/roll, no push/pull processing - 3hrs turn around.

- B&W $11/roll, $16.50/roll for push/pull processing - 3-4 days turn around time.

I always mount or cut my film myself. No point having all 36 mounted when I will keep only 1 or 2 ouf a roll and the rest go to the bin. I've my own scanner, Minolta SD IV, for scanning my films. Cheap scanning service ($3/scans) is just pure cr@p and high quality scanning service costs around $16/scan I think.

See these two samples for comparison of results from Ilford FP4 Plus and Elitechrome 100 desaturated using Channel Mixer. Personally I prefer the skin tone produced by desaturated colour slide.
 
Steve, if the intended use of the photos are for web display and for printing from a digital file then you can get close to the same tones if you start from a colour slide/negative or a b&w negative.

The key would here be in the post-processing (i.e. how you 'desaturate' from colour to b&w).

Having said that the most important factor is still a well exposed original starting point. I've found that some C41 b&w films are very contrasty and hard to get any shadow details from - almost like a slide film where one is 1/2 - 3/4 stop off. Then again that's just my own findings - so take it for what it's worth.

I like shooting in true b&w film due to the extended exposure latitude that you get - it's simply easier get acceptable prints and to pull details from them. I've also found that I really like how the Fuji b&w's scan - Acros and Neopan and I'm a sucker for having to do as little post-processing as possible :)

If you have the chance, shoot a roll of Acros 100 and Neopan 400/1600, find a local lab, have the film developed + contact sheets and if they offer scanning services try that out as well but depending on how good they are you may or may not have to do some scanning at home as well.

Good luck and post some results here :)
 
Kris said:
See these two samples for comparison of results from Ilford FP4 Plus and Elitechrome 100 desaturated using Channel Mixer. Personally I prefer the skin tone produced by desaturated colour slide.
Click to expand...

Could be because it's Ilford (never liked their films...sorry :) ) - now do the same comparison with some Fuji film :)


Here's one example of Fuji Acros:
 
Steve,
Have you tried Ilford XP2 yet? It is C-41 also, but I like it more the Kodak's stuff and it has incredible ASA latitute. I've seen people shoot it from 6oo down to 200 with good results.
 
If you want to shoot in B&W, maybe you could develop yourself. Try Diafine as it is a really easy developer to use. As for the film, I am a fan of Ilford XP2 but I am using Kodak Tri-X nowadays. Do invest in a film scanner as they deliver better results than flatbeds.
 
Thanks for the replies so far, guys. I'm starting to get some ideas to try, anyway.

Peter, I really want to develop myself, but my little one bedroom flat doesn't really give me anywhere to set up a darkroom. Having said that, there's a club in Melbourne which has darkroom facilities available to club members, so I might join them - they also have classes teaching how to do it all, which I'll definitely need. But that's all down the track - for now, it's one of the other options.

Cheers,
Steve
 
Actually for development all you need is a changing bag and the bathroom. You could read up on Diafine development on the internet and trust me, it is as easy as high school chemistry.
 
Peter said:
Actually for development all you need is a changing bag and the bathroom. You could read up on Diafine development on the internet and trust me, it is as easy as high school chemistry.
Click to expand...

Sorry Peter. I have to disagree with you on this. I think it is easier. :)

st3ph3nm, Peter is right that it is easy. You might even be able to do without the changing bag if your flat or bathroom can be made, or are dark enough. Then the chemicals and a develping tank. Clothes pins can be used to hang the film to dry. Chemicals are easy to mix too.

Don't be afraid to try any b/w film out there. Rich mentioned never liking Ilford. I always liked them. Especially their drying characteristics. I never liked Agfa, color or b/w. Others swear by them. We all have different preferences, and only by experimentation, will you know what you personally like. Still, you have to take that first step and use some of the different b/w's out there.

I would say that joining the photo club you mentioned would be a good idea if it isn't too expensive. You should find lots of good advice and help there. Good luck.
 
I would suggest developing your own B+W film too. Like others have said, you don't need a darkroom for this. The developing tank is light-tight so you only need a way of getting the film from the cassette onto a developing reel and then into the tank. You can do this 2 ways. One, use a changing bag designed for this procedure, or two, wait until after dark and block out the remaining dim light in your bathroon by covering your window and the cracks around the door. Usually a towel on the floor is enough for the door. It really is as easy as cooking poorly!
 
Rich Silfver said:
...now do the same comparison with some Fuji film :)
Click to expand...

Well, I did shot a couple rolls of Neopan, here is one shot that turned out rather well. It is a rather unfair comparison because Neopan is ISO400 film (although I rated them at ISO200). No second thought: I will take Elitechrome 100 then desaturate the scan for B&W portraits.

I guess it's all a matter of taste. Everyone has their own preferences :)
 
If you finally decide to stay with C-41 films, I'd suggest you switch to Ilford XP 2. I can't see any difference between XP2 negatives and the negatives of regular black and while films.

Dick
 
Hi st3ph3nm, I'm not a pro either (more a newbie), but I decided to develop myself and as others said it is quite easy!! I didn't took any course, I just read the guides provided by the film manufacturer (ilford in my case) and voila!!! :)
developing yourself is fun, at least for me, I'm always wondering if results are going to be ok. It needs time and experimentation but also gives a lot of options.
 
st3ph3nm
If you like photography, you will love developing your own films. I highly recommend you follow the others' advice. I've been at it, off and on, for 53 years. I don't have a darkroom anymore, just an inexpensive changing bag, thermometer, tank, and chemicals. You will also want some clothespins, measuring cups, and a small bottle opener to pop off the lid of the film cassettes. I store everything in two plastic storage containers and keep them under the bench in my kitchen. Lots of fun. You will enjoy it.
 
st3ph3nm, let me add my voice to the chorus of DIY B&W development. Your total outlay for stuff you need, including first round of chemicals, changing bag and thermometer, will be under $100. You'll recoup that within the first year if you shoot a lot.

Starting with a C-41 film like XP2 is a good way to get launched into B&W. It'll give you scanning and editing experience right away. There are a couple of photographers here on RFF who shoot nothing but colour C-41 film and convert to B&W. Their results are pretty convincing, so that's another viable option.

Once you get your film development kit you can then start experimenting with films to see which B&W films you like the best. My two favs are Tri-X and Neopan 400. Yours may be (and probably will be) quite different.

Gene
 
For B&W, I'm a man of extremes.
My current favorites are Fuji Acros 100 and Ilford Delta 3200.
I've also shot several rolls of Ilford PanF 50 and really liked it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom