120 B&W Roll Film

[JWMster]

So having taken the MF plunge, I realize that my film cost is now multiplied by 4, and this stuff doesn't come in bulk due to the paper backing thing. Best I see are 5 packs. So now I'm curious what folks do to hold the costs down as well as how much you let that affect what you shoot. Do you have everyday film and "art" film? I'm pretty much an Ilford guy (prefer FP4 outside and HP5 for the rest) in 35mm though I'll run something else from time to time, too.

Haven't done Arista, Foma or Kentmere... but I'm not sure it's worth it for just a few pennies per shot. Thoughts? Recommendations?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I don't bracket.

 

[JWMster]

I don't generally either. Hadn't thought of that though. But since you list as multi-format, do you use the same films in different formats, or different? 120 has fewer choices than 35mm, but I don't know how that compares with 4X5 and other LF's. I kind of figure to use the same, but maybe that won't always work.

 

[mshchem]

Prices fluctuate somewhat from time to time on B and H. I think film is cheap. 4 or 5 bucks a roll for modern film is a steal. I shoot a lot of TMY, but lately more and more Ilford FP4 and HP5. All of these modern films are great.
I haven't shot much Foma film, but their papers are beautiful, so are Ilford's.
I would stick with what you have been shooting and processing.

 

[jimjm]

I tend to use the films I am most familiar with, and which I have gotten reliable results in the past with. TMax400, HP5+and Tri-X are my most-often used in 120, and in 35mm as well. I do use Neopan Acros for most low light / night photography because the reciprocity characteristics are a big plus. These are all in the $4 to $5 range. I tend to be a bit more thoughtful with exposure and composition with 120, so the cost per shot isn't a big factor compared to 35mm.
I've been shooting Ferrania P30 in 35mm, and I'm dying to try it in 120. It's really got a different look from these other films, which I like, but the jury's still out on which developers give the best results.

 

[JWMster]

Jim: Looked at your flicker group. Saw the shot of the young boy's photo you uploaded in May... which is FABULOUS. Liked it so much I bought a SQ-A. Reminds me so much of when I was a kid and a very good friend from those days.... long, long, long ago. Kid's grandfather was a WW2 general we all idolized. Kid grew up to be a published writer. I'd love to find some P30... but production must be a part time job for these guys. Have you tried Bergger Panchro 400? Folks say it's like HP5... but I'm not so sure. I was able to find some but haven't gotten 'round to shooting it yet. There's that Zone bit about testing I want to do... some.... not too much. Just enough to know the speeds and times to use in HC-110 and Pyrocat-HD.

 

[mgb74]

Kentmere, to my knowledge, doesn't produce 120 film (which is a shame). I've seen good photographers producing good photographs with Ultrafine (which may be Kentmere) and Arista EDU Ultra (Foma) film. Don't discount those until you try them.

HP5 is still cheaper than tmax or Tri-x.

Samy's camera often has the lowest price (it seems) on 120 film from "the majors".

 

[JWMster]

Thanks! Every dime is another 1/4 shot.

 

[MattKing]

I tend to get the same number of "keepers" out of a roll of 120 as I do out of a roll of 135.
Some of that is due to a slightly different approach. Some of it may be due to being less cautious due to the 135 film being less expensive per shot.
I will say though that even at $7-8 CDN a roll, the 120 film is a deal!

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I don't generally either. Hadn't thought of that though. But since you list as multi-format, do you use the same films in different formats, or different? 120 has fewer choices than 35mm, but I don't know how that compares with 4X5 and other LF's. I kind of figure to use the same, but maybe that won't always work.

Yes, my mains films in formats up to 8x10 are pretty much the same. When I started in large format, I only had a couple of holders for both 4x5 and 8x10. I forced myself to expose one sheet per scene. When working with 120, I try not to bracket.

 

[LarsAC]

I use HP5 in all formats 135-120-4x5, lower speed FP4+ in 135 but Acros in 120. The latter has become unreasonably expensive in 135 unfortunately.

Lars

 

[Siompa]

I just tried fomapan 100 for the first time, and my god I love that film. First time I scanned it I realized it did all I wanted from a b&w film. I haven't tried printing it yet but judging from the negatives it should be a breeze.

I'm not that fond of modern films, sure they're great but I like the classic grain structure.
And at 3.5 € a roll it's hard to beat.

 

[Kevin Caulfield]

Arista 100 is a beautiful film and it's because Foma 100 is a beautiful film.

 

[pdeeh]

Kentmere, to my knowledge, doesn't produce 120 film (which is a shame) ... Ultrafine (which may be Kentmere)

Harman's Kentmere films are not manufactured in 120.
Harman have repeatedly stated over the years that they do not sell rebrands, though I suppose under the new ownership this may yet change.
Ultrafine, therefore, will not be Kentmere.

As for the OP, it's quite hard to find "bad" film these days (was it ever easy?), so pretty much anything you find in 120 is going to be fine so long as you get your processing right. I find the differences between different films once it gets into the darkroom disappear, and I'm guessing most people apart from the very best & professional printers won't see much either.

If you're scanning, I think you'll see more difference; in which case Acros would be my choice. But it is pricey.

 

[pentaxuser]

If you're scanning, I think you'll see more difference; in which case Acros would be my choice. But it is pricey.

By comparison with our friends in the U.S. every film in the U.K. is pricey but Acros especially so in recent times. Acros 120 is about $8 a roll. You have to forgive us at times if we look at "things photographic " with less of a rose-coloured tint in our spectacles.

pentaxuser

 

[Rick A]

Several years back, I purchased 200 rolls of Shanghai GP3 120 film because it was dirt cheap. It was less than $2 a roll, so I set 100 rolls aside for me, and sold the remaining to pay for my stash. Wish I still had some, turned out to be a decent film. Look around for bulk purchase discounts. Don't overlook Fomapan (or EDU Ultra) film, it's good film.

 

[guangong]

Getting back to the original question raised by OP, in my experience using different formats the mental processes are somewhat different. With Minox and Minolta 16 the tendency is to use for grab shots and note taking, although sometimes a remarkable picture sometimes happens. 35mm allows for more experimentation of exposure and composition because of a 36 frame reserve. Also, many 35 mm cameras are easily carried. With 120, the picture taking becomes mentally and artistically more reflective just because of the limited number of exposures per roll (12, 11, or 8 with my my cameras). 4x5 requires even more meditation and care. Each format has advantages and disadvantages but in the end the costs come out about even.
For movies, Super 8 was once much cheaper than 16mm, but total cost (film plus processing) difference is no longer very wide.

 

[JWMster]

Super 8mm - if you were actually going to produce something, is just film size. It remains as it always has, 2nd or 3rd to 16mm. Cost of sound, editting (what's your cutting ratio?), equipment... just doesn't vary that much if you want to do something worthwhile... meaning more than just for laughs.

Think you're on the right track. I look at 35mm exactly as you describe and it can produce amazing output, but my intention is to use MF for more signature, intentional efforts where I have a clear idea of the shot and conditions I want to shoot it in before I go out.

 

[JWMster]

I've seen shots on the web with Shanghai film that were amazing. Couldn't find where it was available though. Probably not for sale here in the USA.

 

[Paul Howell]

Harman's Kentmere films are not manufactured in 120.
Harman have repeatedly stated over the years that they do not sell rebrands, though I suppose under the new ownership this may yet change.
Ultrafine, therefore, will not be Kentmere.

Harmon and Foma custom coat, so Ultrafine might be an older emulsion no longer used by Kentmere, Ilford, or Foma. Although I have not used Ultrafine in 120 it is on my, so far Foma 200 along with TMax 400 has been my go to MF and LF film.

 

[eatfrog]

I've seen shots on the web with Shanghai film that were amazing. Couldn't find where it was available though. Probably not for sale here in the USA.

Not for sale anywhere anymore. I haven't even seen expired stuff on ebay any longer.

 

[pdeeh]

Anything might be anything, yeah ...

 

[Jerevan]

Medium format ... I make no bracketing photographs, and I look through the viewfinder a lot, cover the area looking for angles, tend towards slower (100 and less) films. This also means that I have to set up a tripod if I am outside in anything but summer light.

I tend to buy Ilford FP4/HP5 and Kodak Tri-X: less film rolls for a given amount of money but I prefer to pay for having decent QC and someone standing behind what they manufacture.

This "think before you press the button" mindset spills over to 35 mm - sometimes it is really hard getting through to frame 36!

 

[Sirius Glass]

Do not bracket.
Watch the prices.
Think before each photograph.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I've seen shots on the web with Shanghai film that were amazing. Couldn't find where it was available though. Probably not for sale here in the USA.

Pierre at LFForum facilitates sheet film purchases. You could ask him about roll film versions.

http://www.largeformatphotography.i...lm-Annual-LF-and-ULF-sheet-film-Campaign-2017