1600 ISO 4x5 B&W film, does it exist?

Marco B · Mar 22, 2008

Hi all,

For some night shots, I would like to have some 1600 ISO 4x5 B&W film. I have no idea if this filmspeed actually exists in 4x5 format (I have never seen it here in the Netherlands, but to be honest, I also have never been on the look out for it...), or was ever produced.

Any tips (maybe 3200 ISO instead?) and a link to a possible webshop that sells it, are welcome.

Marco

My webpage

PHOTOTONE · Mar 22, 2008

There is no black and white sheet film made today that has a box speed of over ISO 400.

P C Headland · Mar 22, 2008

Rollei R3 in their high speed developer may do the trick. Check with Robert at FotohuisRovo.

Uhner · Mar 22, 2008

There might be some answers in this thread:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Marco B · Mar 22, 2008

OK, thanks for the info and pointing out the other link.

So Rollei R3 seems to be the only way to go... I will look into this more closely. I already downloaded the R3 datasheet pointed out in the other thread available on the Retrographic website.

Another question:
Can anyone also comment on pre-flashing this film, as pointed out in the other thread? I would like to give this a try, to allow more shadow detail being captured, but what kind of exposures do I need to think of when pre-flashing?

I have a Durst Laborator 1200 with an Ilford Multigrade 500H with two 300W Quartzline ELH bulbs (General Electric), setup for 4x5 with the appropriate diffusing box.

Any indications for pre-flash times for this combo are highly appreciated, before I start wasting film and having to develop all pre-flashed sheets to figure out the real time (Of course I will need to ultimately do this, but having an indication would be of BIG help).

Tim Gray · Mar 22, 2008

Not that I've ever tried it, but what about TXP in diafine? Not 1600 surely, but should give somewhat of a speed boost...

JBrunner · Mar 22, 2008

It does exist. It's called pushing. With 4x5 you can expect much better results with a two stop push, than with smaller formats.

richard ide · Mar 22, 2008

I think you may find your enlarger a little too bright for flashing. I use a Kodak beehive safelight with a 7.5w bulb and an OC filter with 3 sheets drafting film. IIRC at a lamp distance of 10 ft., I flash for 1.5 seconds to get a density of .05 above BF. That is for Delta 100.

JBrunner · Mar 22, 2008

Easiest to preflash with the camera in the field with a grey card.

Dave Miller · Mar 22, 2008

Ilford say that HP5+ will push to EI3200 if developed in Microphen.

RobC · Mar 22, 2008

Why do you need film that fast? Are you photographing moving subjects?

23mjm · Mar 22, 2008

HP5+ pushes nicely to 1600 in a variety of soups. I have done it in 35mm and 120 and it ain't too bad so in 4X5 it shouldn't be a problem at all. The only way you are going to know is if you give it a try. I normally develope in Ilford DDX FWIW

David A. Goldfarb · Mar 22, 2008

I did some experiments with XP-1 and found I could get an honest 2-stop push with TX, a little less with TXT (this was before TXP sheet film came out). You could probably do a little better with HP-5+. Contrast was too low for my purposes, though it would have been good for night photography, which tends to be a high-contrast lighting situation. There is an article with two possible formulas for XP-1 at unblinkingeye.com.

ic-racer · Mar 23, 2008

If you could get by with a 6x9 or 6x12 back you could use Ilford 3200 in 120 format. It has an ISO of 1000.

Marco B · Mar 27, 2008

Thanks all for the suggestions!

The reason I was looking for something like ISO 1600 is a kind of madmen's project: shooting night time pinholes of illuminated buildings with an ultrawide 4x5 pinhole camera...

I have had some preliminary results with about 40 min exposure that showed some promise, but the negs are thin. I did not really push develop though, and did not pre-flash the film. I will give it a try with HP5 and see what I can come up with... and possibly see if I can buy some of that Rollei stuff with the High Speed developer.

m_liddell · Mar 28, 2008

At 40mins surely recipricity failure is a far bigger issue than ISO? Get some film data sheets - I'd have a look at using acros.

David A. Goldfarb · Mar 28, 2008

m_liddell said:
At 40mins surely recipricity failure is a far bigger issue than ISO? Get some film data sheets - I'd have a look at using acros.

I'd agree with that. TMY or TMX would also be good possibilities. TMX is probably faster than HP5+ at that exposure time.

eddie gunks · Mar 28, 2008

Marco B said:
Thanks all for the suggestions!

The reason I was looking for something like ISO 1600 is a kind of madmen's project: shooting night time pinholes of illuminated buildings with an ultrawide 4x5 pinhole camera...

I have had some preliminary results with about 40 min exposure that showed some promise, but the negs are thin. I did not really push develop though, and did not pre-flash the film. I will give it a try with HP5 and see what I can come up with... and possibly see if I can buy some of that Rollei stuff with the High Speed developer.

you may find that the reciprocity of the faster films make them slower than 100 speed films when used at long exposures.

i shoot 4x5 pinhole also. i have found that tmax100 and acros100 are very very fast when you are doing long exposures. give this a try. you may be surprised.

eddie

analogfotog · Mar 28, 2008

Wowzers! Does that ever bring back memories!!

I haven't used sheet film that fast since 1976, when I photographed a church interior on Kodak Royal-X Pan film, which had a box speed of ISO 1250 (formerly known as ASA 1250). As I recall, Kodak gave instructions on pushing the film to ISO 4000, when operating under flat lighting conditions; if memory serves, it called for a 50% development time increase in DK-50.

Interesting, but no help. However, I do recall reading somewhere about how you can push film by exposing the underexposed, but normally developed film, in an airtight chamber, to the fumes of hydrogen peroxide, heated to a temperature of about 100F. I have never seen any info online about this procedure; I will search my printed records at home this weekend. If I can find the original article (from about 1973, I think), I'll drop you a PM.

I have also tried the preflashing route, without much success. I tried that when I was in university, in second year sensitometry class. I couldn't get it to work properly, as it requires an extremely low level of light to activate the film, without fogging it. I wrote a lab report on my project (and got a B+; not bad for a failed experiment!), but ultimately, the results led me nowhere.

Marco B · Mar 28, 2008

m_liddell said:
At 40mins surely reciprocity failure is a far bigger issue than ISO? Get some film data sheets - I'd have a look at using acros.

I already took reciprocity into account to some extent, but clearly not enough. For HP5, it would probably require something like 2-4 hours exposure (more likely 4 considering the negs). Although I am a patient guy (at least when I want to ), that stretches my patience to the limit (hence the question for 1600 ISO).

I have been using Ralph Lambrecht's pinhole dial (Dead Link Removed under "Library") in combination with a conventional film reciprocity table to come up with some sort of estimate. However, it may indeed be better to resort to modern TMax emulsion, as that same table Ralph supplied also shows TMax doing much better in this respect.

Can someone confirm that TMax really is that much better at long exposure times? (e.g. indicated / measured 4 min. translates to 14 min. for TMax 400 and 30 min for conventional according to Ralph's reciprocity table)

Marco B · Mar 28, 2008

By the way, I am also thinking of getting Fuji instant B&W 3000 ISO film. Although I can not enlarge it conventionally, it might be fun to try out (and maybe go hybrid to enlarge).

Soeren · Mar 28, 2008

analogfotog said:
Wowzers!
>SNIP
Interesting, but no help. However, I do recall reading somewhere about how you can push film by exposing the underexposed, but normally developed film, in an airtight chamber, to the fumes of hydrogen peroxide, heated to a temperature of about 100F. I have never seen any info online about this procedure; I will search my printed records at home this weekend. If I can find the original article (from about 1973, I think), I'll drop you a PM.
SNIP<

The method is descriped in one of the Anchell Cookbooks (Darkroom - or Film development cookbook)
I think it is an idea to find the film that suffer the least from recipocity failure.
Kind regards

Marco B · Mar 28, 2008

eddie gunks said:
you may find that the reciprocity of the faster films make them slower than 100 speed films when used at long exposures.

Thanks Eddie. You may be right... I must say I was already slightly surprised looking at the reciprocity table of Ralph. I lists LESS time for TMax 100 compared to 400 for long exposures. E.g. measured 15 min translates to 40 min for 100 and 1h10min for 400 ISO TMax.

It was confusing to me, until you now explained it... learned something valuable new here.

Does anyone actually have a technical explanation for this phenomenon, slow films being FASTER than fast films at long (reciprocity failure) times? :confused:

Marco B · Mar 28, 2008

Soeren said:
I think it is an idea to find the film that suffer the least from recipocity failure

Any suggestions, besides TMax 100? Are there films in 4x5 that will do even better than TMax 100?

eddie gunks · Mar 28, 2008

Marco B said:
Thanks Eddie. You may be right... I must say I was already slightly surprised looking at the reciprocity table of Ralph. I lists LESS time for TMax 100 compared to 400 for long exposures. E.g. measured 15 min translates to 40 min for 100 and 1h10min for 400 ISO TMax.

It was confusing to me, until you now explained it... learned something valuable new here.

Does anyone actually have a technical explanation for this phenomenon, slow films being FASTER than fast films at long (reciprocity failure) times? :confused:

i do not know why that is. but after checking various films for shorter exposure times when using pinholes i discovered this.

i was using foma110 (and love the film) (f216 camera) but my exposures were like 9 min. then i tried tmax100 in the same lighting and it was 1 min! now that is fast!

i use the pinhole designer to calc my exposures. if you take meter reading of your scene at f22 (using f128 as your f number in the pinhole designer. that is my 25mm 4x5 pinhole f number)and it calls for 15 sec then the correct exposure with reciprocity figured in will be 36 min. not too bad really. a scene that is calling for a 30 sec exposure (again taken at f22 on your meter) calls for a 2 hour exposure. i think that a night scene witha building lit up and street light should fall into these time frames.

you could alway do some pushing too.

i hope this helps (and makes sense!). check out the pinhole designer. meter your scene and let us know. let me know your meter ISO, f stop and shutter speeds you decide your scene needs and i will tell you what i would do with tmax100.

eddie

1600 ISO 4x5 B&W film, does it exist?

Marco B

PHOTOTONE

P C Headland

Uhner

Marco B

Tim Gray

JBrunner

Moderator

richard ide

JBrunner

Moderator

Dave Miller

RobC

23mjm

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator

ic-racer

Marco B

m_liddell

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator

eddie gunks

analogfotog

Marco B

Marco B

Soeren

Marco B

Marco B

eddie gunks

1600 ISO 4x5 B&W film, does it exist?

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency