100 and 400 traditional emulsion film (35mm)

gattu marrudu said:

As some brought up ORWO, I just looked at the website and saw they also make a 400 ISO film: ORWO N74plus (400 ASA) Motion Picture Film Specs

Did anyone try that?

Click to expand...

As was stated N74plus was replaced by N75. I have 100 feet of N75 and have been shooting it. It's VERY nice film IMO. I have shot it at both 320 and 400 in XTOL and while I have not done a curve plot, I am pretty sure I could shoot it at 640 and get pretty solid shadow detail. You can only get N75 in 35mm, either bulk from the manufacturer (OrwoNA is the distributor in the US) or in hand-rolled rolls on eBay. N74plus is (for now) available in 120 from Lomography as "Kino Berlin 2019 Edition".

This is N75 at 320 (box speed) in XTOL for 8.5 mins @ 20C:

Pentode said:

I’ve used quite a lot of it and I really like it.
In the case of either N74+ or N75 it’s much easier to find in bulk rolls than in cassettes. I have found Orwo’s current films to be very good products.

Click to expand...

Do you know where to buy those in the US? ORWO North America seems to not have even updated their product list to include N75: http://www.orwona.com/b-w-motion-picture-cinematography-films/ and colorlab.com doesn't have an ecommerce site. I just sent them an inquiry.

relistan said:

As was stated N74plus was replaced by N75. I have 100 feet of N75 and have been shooting it. It's VERY nice film IMO. I have shot it at both 320 and 400 in XTOL and while I have not done a curve plot, I am pretty sure I could shoot it at 640 and get pretty solid shadow detail. You can only get N75 in 35mm, either bulk from the manufacturer (OrwoNA is the distributor in the US) or in hand-rolled rolls on eBay. N74plus is (for now) available in 120 from Lomography as "Kino Berlin 2019 Edition".

This is N75 at 320 (box speed) in XTOL for 8.5 mins @ 20C:

View attachment 260652

Click to expand...

Thanks for the sample, I saw that on a separate thread and it really looks nice.

And thanks for the tips. I saw the Berlln Kino at Freestyle. Following how products are repackaged is a job of its own...

gattu marrudu said:

Do you know where to buy those in the US? ORWO North America seems to not have even updated their product list to include N75: http://www.orwona.com/b-w-motion-picture-cinematography-films/ and colorlab.com doesn't have an ecommerce site. I just sent them an inquiry.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure, since OrwoNA don't list it. I'd write to them and ask. Otherwise, you can order it from Filmotec (the manufacturer) in Germany direct. You have to email them about it and they reply, there is no e-commerce site since it's cinema film. Altrernatively you can get one-off rolls here to try it: https://filmphotographystore.com/search?type=product&q=orwo <-- N74plus not N75

Pentode said:

I originally bought Efke 100 in the 1990s because it was cheap. I ended up liking it very much and so I continued buying it because it was good.

I love the idea that CHS 100 II might be similar to Efke - or even better - but it is, sadly, the opposite of cheap.

I really appreciate ADOX’s commitment to Black & White photography and the high quality of the products they’ve brought to the market and, with that in mind, I try to buy their films when I can. I also completely understand why their films cost as much as they do so this is not a criticism by any means. Their pricing does restrict me from using CHS as an everyday film, though. I wish they offered it in 100’ rolls.

Click to expand...

CHS 100 II is positioned in price alongside the films of the competition and being inbetween the others. Without tax a roll is offered for 5,83 EUR´s. We can´t really be cheaper than this.

About the poured emulsions we can state that Foma is not using this kind of technique since many decades. They are the most modern film manufacturer from all eastern manufacturers. In 1991 they introduced tabular grain films (Fomapan T200 and T800) made acording to the Kodak patents using double Jet precipitation directly into the impeller (similar to Kodak). This is state of the art.
Later these were renamed in "just" 200 and 800 because of a trademark conflict with Kodak in the US.
Efke films were the ones made acording to the old ADOX recipes with some kind of a "gravity controlled pouring" until the end. Apart from other things this is what put the lid on them. Customers were not willing to pay the extra silver costs their emulsions needed (about double the silver compared to Foma) because of their overall struggles to maintain quality consitant. Shortly before they fell apart we set up ADOX finishing with the main target to after inspect on efke´s quality even deeper than we already did and thus get it up to charge the necessary prices to sustain them. Sadly this never happened.

On a side note you do not need a poured emulsion (Kippemulsion). With any modern emulsion making method you can replicate a "Kippemulsion" if you want. There are many good reasons why no one does it like this any longer.

You need a film which suits your vision. If you liked the old efke/CHS type I than CHS type II is the closest match but there are other fine films out there as well.

R.Gould said:

I have read that they are they only poured emulsion films still in production

Click to expand...

I'm not sure if Foma are slot-die coating or using some form of slide/ bead coating. From what I've seen of Foma's drier type/ capacity (looked like a festoon), I don't think they're using higher speed slide/ waterfall coating - though Adox can probably confirm or deny this.

Kodachromeguy said:

Fuji Acros 100 is a more modern emulsion (not sure if it is T-grain)

Click to expand...

It seems to be using an epitaxial structure (like some Ilford films apparently do) with high aspect ratio grain structures that have 3D grain structures grown on specific points. 'High aspect ratio' seems to be a more universal terminology than 'T-grain' that covers each manufacturer's own flat grain shape preferences/ capabilities with regards to that particular type of chosen crystal growth habit.

Pentode said:

Modern Tri-X (also really nice) is no longer a traditional grained film, but is actually a hybrid of traditional and T-grain technology.

Click to expand...

Only in the sense that Tri-X shares some sensitising aspects with modern high aspect ratio grain structure emulsions. It's still using 3D crystal structures - and in fact many films that use high aspect ratio grain structures in some of their emulsion layers, use 3D crystals in others - or as mentioned above, epitaxially grow various 3D crystals on the edges/ points of flat crystal structures. The idea seems to be to balance the perceived tonal benefits of the old uncontrolled grain growth emulsions (K-grain) with better tonal scale & sharpness that highly controlled/ designed emulsion structures offer. Realistically, since somewhere between 1950 and 1955, almost all emulsions subsequently designed from that point have had more and more tightly controlled emulsion growth/ selection for grain characteristics - and a lot of the supposed criticism of T-grain films seem to owe more to users not understanding that Kodak seemed to feel that the average user no longer needed the designed-in training wheels of earlier films to prevent excess highlight density being built.

ADOX Fotoimpex said:

CHS 100 II is positioned in price alongside the films of the competition and being inbetween the others. Without tax a roll is offered for 5,83 EUR´s. We can´t really be cheaper than this.

About the poured emulsions we can state that Foma is not using this kind of technique since many decades. They are the most modern film manufacturer from all eastern manufacturers. In 1991 they introduced tabular grain films (Fomapan T200 and T800) made acording to the Kodak patents using double Jet precipitation directly into the impeller (similar to Kodak). This is state of the art.
Later these were renamed in "just" 200 and 800 because of a trademark conflict with Kodak in the US.
Efke films were the ones made acording to the old ADOX recipes with some kind of a "gravity controlled pouring" until the end. Apart from other things this is what put the lid on them. Customers were not willing to pay the extra silver costs their emulsions needed (about double the silver compared to Foma) because of their overall struggles to maintain quality consitant. Shortly before they fell apart we set up ADOX finishing with the main target to after inspect on efke´s quality even deeper than we already did and thus get it up to charge the necessary prices to sustain them. Sadly this never happened.

On a side note you do not need a poured emulsion (Kippemulsion). With any modern emulsion making method you can replicate a "Kippemulsion" if you want. There are many good reasons why no one does it like this any longer.

You need a film which suits your vision. If you liked the old efke/CHS type I than CHS type II is the closest match but there are other fine films out there as well.

Click to expand...

Ok, so "poured emulsion" relates to preparing the emulsion, not coating it.

ADOX Fotoimpex said:

CHS 100 II is positioned in price alongside the films of the competition and being inbetween the others. Without tax a roll is offered for 5,83 EUR´s. We can´t really be cheaper than this.

Click to expand...

Completely reasonable for a first class film, and cheaper than a certain amount of the competition.

markjwyatt said:

Ok, so "poured emulsion" relates to preparing the emulsion, not coating it.

Click to expand...

Ingredients were literally tipped into the reaction vessel at various stages, as opposed to being pumped in simultaneously under the surface etc. The word used in some the Agfa documentation hoovered up by the writers of the BIOS/ FIAT reports post WW2 was 'gekippt'.

ADOX Fotoimpex said:

CHS 100 II is positioned in price alongside the films of the competition and being inbetween the others. Without tax a roll is offered for 5,83 EUR´s. We can´t really be cheaper than this.

About the poured emulsions we can state that Foma is not using this kind of technique since many decades. They are the most modern film manufacturer from all eastern manufacturers. In 1991 they introduced tabular grain films (Fomapan T200 and T800) made acording to the Kodak patents using double Jet precipitation directly into the impeller (similar to Kodak). This is state of the art.
Later these were renamed in "just" 200 and 800 because of a trademark conflict with Kodak in the US.
Efke films were the ones made acording to the old ADOX recipes with some kind of a "gravity controlled pouring" until the end. Apart from other things this is what put the lid on them. Customers were not willing to pay the extra silver costs their emulsions needed (about double the silver compared to Foma) because of their overall struggles to maintain quality consitant. Shortly before they fell apart we set up ADOX finishing with the main target to after inspect on efke´s quality even deeper than we already did and thus get it up to charge the necessary prices to sustain them. Sadly this never happened.

On a side note you do not need a poured emulsion (Kippemulsion). With any modern emulsion making method you can replicate a "Kippemulsion" if you want. There are many good reasons why no one does it like this any longer.

You need a film which suits your vision. If you liked the old efke/CHS type I than CHS type II is the closest match but there are other fine films out there as well.

Click to expand...

Will there ever be a substitute for eFKe kb 50 and 25?

gattu marrudu said:

1) As stated elsewhere in this thread, TX has been semi-flattened and mixed up with dyes. That, according to Anchell, was done mostly for economic reasons at the expense of depth and character.

Click to expand...

If you think old Tri-X didn't make use of sensitizing dyes, you don't understand how modern (or even close to modern) films are made.
I would have loved to have had current Tri-X when I was using a lot of Tri-X back in the 1970s. The current film has much finer grain but otherwise gives similarly high quality results.
I have no problem with people preferring the grainy aesthetic from half a century ago, but "character"?

I guess some people want their photographs to be as close to reality as one can, and others want to see the medium come through

TMAX 400 is a wonderful film that will live forever in the shadow of Tri X because it's "too sterile/too digital" or whatever phrase people

GarageBoy said:

I guess some people want their photographs to be as close to reality as one can, and others want to see the medium come through

TMAX 400 is a wonderful film that will live forever in the shadow of Tri X because it's "too sterile/too digital" or whatever phrase people

Click to expand...

Plastic was the buzz word of the day.

I would say steer clear of Fomapan 200 as it is not a traditional cubic grain film....it's Foma's T-grain film. It's lovely but probably not what you're looking for.

I'd suggest you try Fomapan 100, Fomapan 400 or the Adox CHS 100.

I have not tried Adox CHS 100 but you've read all about it above. I have experience with the Foma films and would suggest they meet OP's requirements.

This was shot today on Fomapan 100 today and developed in kodak T-Max