B&W Sheet Film Survey Pt. 3 (ISO 200-400)

[jstraw]

Imagine if you will...

You're leaving on a shooting trip. You're presently all out of film and must restock before you go. You will not be able to restock while traveling.

You can only pick one of these films for your trip (don't worry, there are two other parts to this story, you will be able to pick some other films as well).

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

The poll is a bit confusing.

You could call one option Bergger/Fortepan/J&C Classic 200 and another Fortepan/J&C Classic 400 (you left off J&C 400).

It probably doesn't make sense to list Arista.Edu, since it's been replaced by Arista.Edu Ultra.

 

[jstraw]

I don't know if I can edit the polls. I'll check.

Thanks.

 

[jstraw]

I can't. The admins can but people are already responding...dunno what to do!

I'll tally mentions of J&C 400 in the thread and count Bergger/Fortepan/J&C Classic 200 as one item in the summary.

Of course there wouldn't need to be a summary if I'd have gotten this right to begin with...

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Okay, I've fixed it and merged all the rebranded films to the extent that I know (I'm not sure about what the Maco and Wephota films really are), adding Fomapan 400 to Arista.EDU Ultra. Let me know if you spot any mistakes or if you would like to add other options.

 

[jstraw]

Thanks very much David.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

I'm a big fan of Tri-X @200. I protect highlights during exposure, develop them to death and it creates a very contrasty negative with little shadow detail... It's great if you like that sort of negative.

I've found the film is quite tough and doesn't scratch easily. Best. Shawn

 

[Curt]

Ok, I'll take a stab at it. I am going to be taking a trip soon and will take JandC Classic 400 and Efke 25 in 5x7.

In 120 nothing faster than 50. If I don't use a tripod then there would be a law against it. Since I am not at the Tomb of Napoleon then I can use a tripod.

Should I be using Ilford HP5 and not JandC Classic 400? Any thoughts would be welcomed, I have some time to order some if persuaded.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Personally, I prefer the look of Classic 400 to HP5+, but you can decide such things for yourself. Shoot some film and decide. They're both very capable films.

 

[Alex Hawley]

Ok, I'll take a stab at it. I am going to be taking a trip soon and will take JandC Classic 400 and Efke 25 in 5x7.

Should I be using Ilford HP5 and not JandC Classic 400? Any thoughts would be welcomed, I have some time to order some if persuaded.

I have to agree with Curt. J&C 400 and PL 25 could do it for me. I've had great success with J&C 400. I think its every bit as capable as Tri-X and HP5 are.

 

[Curt]

Since the Classic 400 and PL25 is what I have in quantity that's what I'll take for the trip. I have to admit that I haven't used HP5+ for decades. I have used the Classic 400 in 120 with Pyrocat HD and it's fine. I have used a lot of 25 ISO in the roll film sizes but not in 5x7. I saw the John Anderson photographs in View Camera magazine and bought a bunch of 25 packs from JandC in that size. I'll run some tests and try it out. I've used about every slow speed film I could find over the years. I was especially partial to Panatomic X then Agfa Pan 25. I like the Rollei Pan 25 and would like to use it for all of the medium format work. I am limited by the price for what I want to do. I used it at the Valley of Fire and the negatives are stunning. I also used some Ilford PanF 50 of Hoover Dam and the results were fantastic. It goes to show that there are some excellent choices out there.

 

[jovo]

I hope this poll isn't construed to 'mean' anything other than to record what each voter chose. Some folks who take this poll have used several or even all of the listed films, and others, like me, have only used one or two of them. What's good to see, though, is that there are still some choices to be made...and that's very heartening!

 

[jstraw]

I hope this poll isn't construed to 'mean' anything other than to record what each voter chose. Some folks who take this poll have used several or even all of the listed films, and others, like me, have only used one or two of them. What's good to see, though, is that there are still some choices to be made...and that's very heartening!

It's an informal guage of poularity. If someone has used 10 films and chooses film X, it suggests that deliberation led to that choice. If someone has used two films and chooses film X it suggests a lack of dissatisfaction with it. Theses are just inferences. There are other inferences that could be valid.

In conducting this list and survey undertaking as I retun to large format photography I had several purposes:

1. Consolidation of information about what sheet films are availiable
2. Sorting out what products are actually the same material
3. Taking an informal "snapshot" of the general popularity of these items

How others make use of this information is their decision. Personally, I think it's useful to know if a certain product is readily available but is eschewed by the shooting community. It may be a fine product but it's a low percentage bet. It's also useful to me to know if a product is so wildly popular that asking questions about it is more likely to generate informed responses.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I've moved Wephota NP-27 to the Fortepan 400 category on the basis of Christian Kolinski's post in the ISO 100 poll. There were no votes for it anyway, but can anyone else confirm that NP-27 is Forte and not Foma (since NP-22 is Foma)?

 

[jstraw]

Is it true that J&C will be manufacturing their own films in the future and not using an OEM supplier?

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Is it true that J&C will be manufacturing their own films in the future and not using an OEM supplier?

That's the plan, as I understand it.

 

[jstraw]

That's the plan, as I understand it.

You have no idea how appealing the idea of shooting a film made in my state, less than an hour from my house is. Too cool.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Well, they haven't said necessarily that they'll be manufacturing it in Kansas.

 

[jstraw]

I thought I read that they built their new plant here.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I think they have a warehouse there, but I don't know that they've decided where the plant will be.

 

[jstraw]

Ah, I see. I'll be a few blocks from there today. I'm tempted to go nose around if I have the time. If I do, I'll report back.

 

[Scott Peters]

I really like the JandC 400, but recently shot my kodak Tmax 400 - that is really nice stuff. But, almost twice the price. Also, you can't do Dev by inspection with the TMAX. At least I couldn't. I couldn't see through it.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I just kind of happened upon Tri-X one fine day, and despite not liking how Kodak does business, they do have incredible quality batch to batch. The Tri-X in sheets that's currently available is great for certain situations, but I wish there was the old 400 still around. I still have some in a box of 100, but not that much left.
I may give HP5 a stab in the future, since I really like Ilford as a company and I use FP4 all the time. If the higher speed emulsion is anywhere near as good as the medium speed, I'll be very happy with it.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Do you really want to see through it? I just look on the base side when the highlights start coming through. Perhaps you should try presoaking the film.

- Thom

I really like the JandC 400, but recently shot my kodak Tmax 400 - that is really nice stuff. But, almost twice the price. Also, you can't do Dev by inspection with the TMAX. At least I couldn't. I couldn't see through it.