100-125 ISO Film question

Mustang

A
Mustang

  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
32nd Avenue

A
32nd Avenue

  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Saab

A
Saab

  • 0
  • 0
  • 45
Chevy Van

A
Chevy Van

  • 1
  • 0
  • 50

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
182,064
Messages
2,519,657
Members
95,487
Latest member
coralluxurycleaning
Recent bookmarks
0

jp498

Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
1,502
Location
Owls Head ME
Shooter
Multi Format
Get a 2nd body for the other film.. and/or get some lights to make iso400 easier to use indoors. Doesn't have to be rude 1990's flash look; read Mortensen's books. Kids will pose for a small bribe. Use digital for candids indoors.
 

koraks

Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
5,609
Location
Europe
Shooter
Multi Format
@Helge I didn't intend to start a film vs. digital debate and won't engage in one. YMMV, we are all entitled to the level of complexity we need, each person has their own standards, etc. etc.
 

Helge

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
3,301
Location
Denmark
Shooter
Medium Format
@Helge I didn't intend to start a film vs. digital debate and won't engage in one. YMMV, we are all entitled to the level of complexity we need, each person has their own standards, etc. etc.

It’s not at all a nefarious seed for a vs debate. And I frankly can’t see how you can construe it as one.
It’s simple facts that are good to know.
 

koraks

Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
5,609
Location
Europe
Shooter
Multi Format
It’s not at all a nefarious seed for a vs debate. And I frankly can’t see how you can construe it as one.

Well, the technical comparison you made led me to believe the intent of your post was to conclude that one option would be better than another. And that's the pattern that film vs. digital discussions tend to follow, so I don't think my perception on this is so far-fetched.

Anyway, we're drifting off topic, so I'll leave it at this.
 

blee1996

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 25, 2008
Messages
231
Location
SF Bay Area, California
Shooter
Multi Format
How about keeping your Delta 400 film in one camera, and shoot it at different ISO for indoors (3200) and outdoors (100). Then use developers like Diafine to compensate for the different ISO exposed?
 

JerseyDoug

Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Messages
165
Shooter
35mm RF
I bulk load 12-exposure rolls of 35mm B&W film. If whatever film I have in the camera is not appropriate for the prevailing light I rewind the roll and put in a different film. If there aren't a lot of exposed frames on the removed roll I make a voice note on my iPhone of the frame number when I removed the film and reuse it later, skipping one frame to avoid overlaps.
 

Radost

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2021
Messages
614
Location
USA from Ukraine
Shooter
Multi Format
I bulk load 12-exposure rolls of 35mm B&W film. If whatever film I have in the camera is not appropriate for the prevailing light I rewind the roll and put in a different film. If there aren't a lot of exposed frames on the removed roll I make a voice note on my iPhone of the frame number when I removed the film and reuse it later, skipping one frame to avoid overlaps.
This is complicating the process. tripple the load development time
 

Brad Deputy

Subscriber
Joined
Feb 23, 2021
Messages
35
Location
Martha Lake, WA
Shooter
35mm
If I find myself needing indoor shots with a slow film loaded, I'll pull out the T-32 for my Olympus OM4ti.

I recently picked up a remote TTL cable, which gives me several feet to hold the flash module somewhere else to bounce it. Haven't tried it with actual photos yet, but tested it (the base on my T-32 broke off, which prompted me to try a cable, but I did end up super-gluing it back on and it's holding :smile: )
 

Helge

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
3,301
Location
Denmark
Shooter
Medium Format
+1



+1

Keep things simple for yourself.

Might as well keep shooting FP4 if he is going to develop in B&W chemistry.

E996B8EE-B303-494A-88FC-B5FCE9D7A94D.jpeg

This is XP2 in C-41 though.

But not miles off from FP4.

8AE87124-A9F3-4D50-A995-1232A7AC32AB.jpeg


Stand development might be an option?

ND filters is a bit daft for this. But if you really want to go the filter route, why not stack some other filters that might improve the photo at the same time as tamping down the light? Such as a green or orange filter and a polarizer to make the sky dark?
A PL and an orange filter is already three stops down. Even if you push process the film to 1600 you are still in a manageable 400 in bright sun (1/500 f16)
 
Last edited:

npl

Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2021
Messages
79
Location
France
Shooter
35mm
Might as well keep shooting FP4 if he is going to develop in B&W chemistry.

View attachment 327463
This is XP2 in C-41 though.

But not miles off from FP4.

View attachment 327464

Stand development might be an option?

ND filters is a bit daft for this. But if you really want to go the filter route, why not stack some other filters that might improve the photo at the same time as tamping down the light? Such as a green or orange filter and a polarizer to make the sky dark?
A PL and an orange filter is already three stops down. Even if you push process the film to 1600 you are still in a manageable 400 in bright sun (1/500 f16)

Color filters and polarizer are great, but you may not want to use them in every compositions. ND filters are, well, neutrals.

Using only delta 3200 and putting a ND filter when needed does answer OP's problem, but yes of course it's a bit.. extreme :smile: it's one imperfect solution among all the other imperfects solutions.

But ND filters are still usefull tools to cary, along the others ones you mentionned. For exemple if you shoot HP5+ in full sunlight and you need a very shallow depth of field for a shot. Yes you could use a very fast shutter speed, but in practice most films cameras won't go over 1/1000 or 1/2000 at best.
 

Radost

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2021
Messages
614
Location
USA from Ukraine
Shooter
Multi Format
Color filters and polarizer are great, but you may not want to use them in every compositions. ND filters are, well, neutrals.

Using only delta 3200 and putting a ND filter when needed does answer OP's problem, but yes of course it's a bit.. extreme :smile: it's one imperfect solution among all the other imperfects solutions.

But ND filters are still usefull tools to cary, along the others ones you mentionned. For exemple if you shoot HP5+ in full sunlight and you need a very shallow depth of field for a shot. Yes you could use a very fast shutter speed, but in practice most films cameras won't go over 1/1000 or 1/2000 at best.

ND complicates and adds more pieces to care for. Faster shutter camera is a better solution. ANd I am sorry that Leica only goes to a 1000.
 

npl

Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2021
Messages
79
Location
France
Shooter
35mm
ND complicates and adds more pieces to care for. Faster shutter camera is a better solution. ANd I am sorry that Leica only goes to a 1000.

What does Leica have to to with anything ? You obviously own a camera with fast shutter speeds but are oblivious to the fact that it's not the norm, at all. And back on topic, you end up with the same problem than ND filters anyway : grainy negatives of high speed speed when a slower film woul've been better in sunlight.
 

Steven Lee

Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2022
Messages
410
Location
USA
Shooter
Medium Format
I like the look of FP4 or Delta 100, and I often shoot with it during the bright day. But I often left the roll unfinished during the day and when the sun comes down, or when I'm inside the house with my kids, I feel I'm unable to use this camera anymore because the film is too slow.

My impression is that 95% of people here own at least a hundred cameras perpetually loaded with every film stock in existence, so your problem isn't relevant to them :smile:
 

Radost

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2021
Messages
614
Location
USA from Ukraine
Shooter
Multi Format
My impression is that 95% of people here own at least a hundred cameras perpetually loaded with every film stock in existence, so your problem isn't relevant to them :smile:

Yes but the people with 100 cameras “ like me” sometimes want to go out with one camera.
 

Radost

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2021
Messages
614
Location
USA from Ukraine
Shooter
Multi Format
What does Leica have to to with anything ? You obviously own a camera with fast shutter speeds but are oblivious to the fact that it's not the norm, at all. And back on topic, you end up with the same problem than ND filters anyway : grainy negatives of high speed speed when a slower film woul've been better in sunlight.

Fast shutter is not the norm? Maybe for MF.
Also since when is grain a bad thing?
 

npl

Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2021
Messages
79
Location
France
Shooter
35mm
Fast shutter is not the norm? Maybe for MF.
Also since when is grain a bad thing?
I was thinking 35mm SLRs and rangefinders. Until the 80's and electronic shutters a max speed of 1/1000 or 1/2000 is/was the norm. We are talking hundreds of models, millions of bodies. It's by far the most common type of cameras you find on the market, that a lot of us own and shoot.

Grain is not a bad thing, but OP said that he like delta 100 and fp4, and that delta 3200 is not his favorite. So I'm assuming he doesn't want "big" grain in every shots.
 

Radost

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2021
Messages
614
Location
USA from Ukraine
Shooter
Multi Format
I was thinking 35mm SLRs and rangefinders. Until the 80's and electronic shutters a max speed of 1/1000 or 1/2000 is/was the norm. We are talking hundreds of models, millions of bodies. It's by far the most common type of cameras you find on the market, that a lot of us own and shoot.

Grain is not a bad thing, but OP said that he like delta 100 and fp4, and that delta 3200 is not his favorite. So I'm assuming he doesn't want "big" grain in every shots.

True. But also there are so many cameras with 4000 speed And even a few with 8000.
I personally when I” know i am at the beach and then afternoon/evening”use Minolta A7 with Sony 50mm F1.4 lens and a 400 or 800 iso Kodak film.

True. 3200 has IMHO ugly grain at any speed. I tried it with xtol and with the recommended DDX.
 

Tim Stapp

Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2012
Messages
436
Location
Big Rapids, MI
Shooter
4x5 Format
It's funny how flash lighting has fallen by the wayside. When I first started in photography it was "flash bulbs" when light fell to low. Then we really took a step forward and "electronic flash" came along. Now, with digital, flash is almost a thing of the past for most folks. Flash is just another tool in our tool box and I still keep my flash units from my wedding photography days. Yes, even today the use of flash can improve some photos, but it takes skill to know how to use it correctly. One thing in the favor of flash at present is that there are tons of used flash heafds on the big auction.
To the OP, if you like the slower film better than anything else, get a swivel head flash unit. Otherwise I would go with HP5+ or TMY2. Or, as some folks here suggest, a second body. Those are the three choices I think that are the best. Now you're the one that has to decide.
From my wedding shooting days, I still have 4 swivel head speedlights. I always had one on camera with one as a spare. ALWAYS changed batteries out between the getting ready shots, ceremony and then reception. Later at the reception, I had several lights positioned around the room controlled by an on camera trigger.
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2006
Messages
759
Location
Oklahoma, US
Shooter
Multi Format
FP-4 inside a house at night is restrictive…although a Leica with 35/2 cron can pull off snots if you brace the camera…..even as slow as 1/8th at f/2.8.

Tri-X at 200 shot inside a well lite office building does fine. For those evening home pictures digital is the better answer. Most of us have a phone by us at all times. Use it.
 
Joined
Sep 19, 2003
Messages
13,163
Location
K,Germany
Shooter
Medium Format
Most people are conditioned to only think of flash as “that hard, flat with razor sharp drop shadows thing, that everybody hates”.
The mere mention of flash turns on a giant NO sign in their heads. “It’s difficult, clunky and looks stupid”.
Instead of a YES sign of opportunity and creative control. And first and foremost beautiful lighting with slow, fine, universal and cheap film.

Fast film certainly has its place. But should not be nearly as ubiquitous and often reached for as it is.

I agree flash is a beautiful light-modeling tool.
 

Huss

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
8,028
Location
Hermosa Beach, CA
Shooter
Multi Format
Out of curiosity, I pushed a roll/shot a roll of Kentmere 400 at 1600. I used it at 1600 in everything from bright daylight to dim indoors.

Thread here:
I like the look of FP4 or Delta 100, and I often shoot with it during the bright day. But I often left the roll unfinished during the day and when the sun comes down, or when I'm inside the house with my kids, I feel I'm unable to use this camera anymore because the film is too slow. Then, I have to use my digital camera just because the slow film is my analog camera.

What do you think about this? Would you shoot with 100 film in low light, would you replace the film with half roll through. Would you prefer to always shoot with faster film always and avoid situations when you cannot shot because the film?

But sometimes I feel the same with Tri-X. It's a bit faster, more flexible, but when it gets dark in my house, I still feel I cannot shoot it with it, it's too slow. I need much much faster film, otherwise it will be either underexposed or a way slow shutter for two kids that never stop moving.

But then I insert Delta 3200, shoot in the house half way though and the next day, it's sunny and bright outside and I have Delta 3200 inside (not my favorite). And then I just shoot something random to finish the roll and put another film. That's the waste, but I don't think of anything better yet. I know there's a way to shot the roll half way and then re-insert it again, and rewind it to the position where it was before, but I never tried that. I'm not that profficient with the film, so it's not a second nature to me. I'd need to take all the notes and pay much more attention and potentially ruin the previous shots, rather than save some, but if that's the only way, I guess I'll have to learn it.

Out of curiosity, I pushed a roll/shot a roll of Kentmere 400 at 1600. I used it at 1600 in everything from bright daylight to dim indoors.

Thread here:

 

alanrockwood

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Messages
2,037
Shooter
Multi Format
Second body sounds the best for me because I'd rather have slower film with less grain always in my camera when I need it, and faster only when it gets dark.

I actually have the second body, that I got from my father but I tried it once to make sure it works and I didn't touched it since, so I'm not used to this camera.

Buying a second body for indoor shots to replicate my main camera would be too expensive :smile:

What camera body is your main one? How expensive would it be to replicate it? Is the second body (the one you got from your father) good enough?
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
43,894
Location
Southern California
Shooter
Multi Format
I prefer bounce flash or diffused flash to direct flash when they are possible.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom