Yes it all boils down to how large a volume, how long you have to live and crucially how long you can be sure you will be interested in film. In the case of two same speed films such as D400 and HP5 I'd have thought it was unlikely you will abandon either before using 100ft or 30m. In terms of the equivalent in cassettes a bulk roll is only 20 rolls. .You'd have to shoot a lot to cover the cost of good bulk loading gear (not cheap !) before it's interesting. Sure, it will be at one point and for folks shooting large volume and commited to one film it can make sense.
A darkroom and some scissors makes for a pretty cheap bulk loading experience.... That's how I wrangle the 400ft rolls I have
I was gifted one of the original Lloyds Bulk Loaders - clearly well used, but in fine working condition. Those can be had for $25-$40 USD on the marketplace if you watch carefully and have some patience.There are still reasonably cheap second hand bulk loaders.
pentaxuser
Matt, would you mind elaborating this a bit?
Paul,I am inclined to agree with this, but - I also find T-max films to be reasonably malleable in terms of the look they deliver.
Where a film like Tri-X or HP5+ have a characteristic look “baked in” to them, T-max is far more neutral. This is because Tri-X has an S-shaped curve, whereas T-Max 400 has a much more straight line curve. (forgive me if I am overstating the obvious)
Often, photographers prefer a film that has a definite “look” bias; they know their images are going to have a certain visual character if they choose something like Tri-X, and they know how to work with those characteristics. For many, T-Max can appear sterile and overly clean, lacking the qualities that define it as having "film" traits. This perception of “digital-looking” is valid, as T-Max’s lack of distinct traits may not resonate with all photographers.
But I have learned to be thoughtful about which film I use for the circumstances. Sometimes Tri-X (or FP4+) is better suited to how I see a scene, and other times I want that T-Max neutrality for an image.
Some examples, photographing the same scene on different days (but similar lighting conditions):
This photo was made with Tri-X
This photo was made with FP4+
and this photo was made with T-Max 400
The differences are subtle, but discernible to the trained eye.
Paul,
Couldn't pull up your FP4+ photo, but I get the drift of what you're talking about or explaining.
Many think it is too clinical, the straight line H&D curve. I shoot Foma 400 as my daily walk around film, when traveling Tmax 400 and 100. Tmax 400 can be shot at 800 without increase in developer time, 1600 is a true push about 1 1/2 stops. Tmax 400 works well with a range of developers, for full speed and shadow details, DDX or Tmax developer, for finer grain XTOL or D76, and it is very good with pyro.For B&W films, I agree. T-Max 400 is the winner, hands-down. It has finer grain than some ISO 100-125 films and an almost straight-line H&D curve. I'm not sure why it isn't more popular.
Tmax 400 works well with a range of developers, for full speed and shadow details, DDX or Tmax developer, for finer grain XTOL or D76, and it is very good with pyro.
You can manipulate the curve shape a bit with T-Max 400, if you vary the developer and development technique.
And its inherently fine grain means you can both under-expose and over-expose it, adjust development time accordingly, and the resulting increase in grain doesn't penalize you as much as with other films.
I expect @Steven Lee is the type of photographer who refines his approach to film in order to wrest the highest amount of detail and tonality out of the results. And if you do that, your results from T-Max 400 may very well resemble the results from digital.
But there are many other things you can get out of T-Max 400.
And there is absolutely no doubt that if you prefer to print optically, you want a film negative - whether or not you are looking for something that behaves like digital.
@retina_restoration Those are gorgeous images. Too good!When an image is so appealing, it fails to serve the tech/demonstration purpose you had originally shared it for.
But there are many other things you can get out of T-Max 400.
When and if I post any image here it is always as straight out of the "oven" as possible. When you doctor or fudge with an image and then post it you're actually committing fraud unless you actually tell everything thing you've done to the negative, print or slide in post software app and scanning.Completely agree.What these images demonstrate is the artistry of @retina_restoration which is of a very high order of excellence. I would love to see the images without any postprocessing other than setting of white and black points as such images will give a better idea of the differences between the films and how much postprocessing is needed for each.
Paul,It appears that the link I put in for the FP4 negative didn't get saved. You can view that image here.
Thanks Matt. This is exactly what I want to learn from you.Would you mind sharing your learning?
When and if I post any image here it is always as straight out of the "oven" as possible. When you doctor or fudge with an image and then post it you're actually committing fraud unless you actually tell everything thing you've done to the negative, print or slide in post software app and scanning.
thanks for the answer, for me, not accounting for the price of the loader but including the price of cartridges, bulk loading illford film can save me at least 30% which is nice, not a huge saving but better than nothing,
when you say "blow a couple of rolls", do you mean screwing up in the loading process ? I've never done it before so i need to be pretty careful, any tips ? i got the AP bulk loader BTW.
And you're right about getting a couple rolls of delta 400 before committing to the bulk roll, i'll probably do that to test it out a little, at box speed.
A darkroom and some scissors makes for a pretty cheap bulk loading experience.... That's how I wrangle the 400ft rolls I have
Yeah that can happen for sure, I got those plastic cartridges and i intend on using them twice each to avoid any light leaks in the future, so far so good, a already loaded a couple of them, taping the film to the spool, and it works great ! i could maybe save some film length by taping it to the base of an already-attached film, I could gain maybe an inch or two but it aint worth it for me, and yes it can be difficult to keep track of which roll is which, especially when they're all black with no indications, even more when i start to do some 24exp rolls, i should probably put some tape on them and write it so i dont mistake them with the 36exp ones, also, keeping the exposed ones in a separate box until development helps to avoid mixing them with the new ones.Re: "blowing" a couple of rolls, a couple of scenarios come to mind:
I'm sure folks can chip in with a whole lot more potential pitfalls.
- Reusing a factory cartridge and having the new film detach from the stub remaining of the old film strip.
- Reusing a factory cartridge and YOU mis-identify the film in the cartridge.
- Reusing a factory cartridge and the camera DX system mis-identifies what ISO speed film is in the cartridge.
- Mis-loading the camera and not getting the film to wind onto the takeup spool meaning that you shot you entire vacation on the leader of your roll of film.
i intend on using them twice each to avoid any light leaks in the future
The other big issue with plastic cartridges in the last few years including so we ordered in for the school is absolutely ZERO quality control. We got cartridges with no felt, one with the felt at 90 degrees to the cartridge lips, and some so tight they squeaked when film was pulled through them (wrong spools).Yeah that can happen for sure, I got those plastic cartridges and i intend on using them twice each to avoid any light leaks in the future, so far so good, a already loaded a couple of them, taping the film to the spool, and it works great ! i could maybe save some film length by taping it to the base of an already-attached film, I could gain maybe an inch or two but it aint worth it for me, and yes it can be difficult to keep track of which roll is which, especially when they're all black with no indications, even more when i start to do some 24exp rolls, i should probably put some tape on them and write it so i dont mistake them with the 36exp ones, also, keeping the exposed ones in a separate box until development helps to avoid mixing them with the new ones.
All in all, i didnt think I'd find being able to load 12-24exp rolls so useful but it really is ! should start developing them soon and I'm pretty impatient to see the result, also to see if i loaded them in adequate darkness (I did it correctly but i suspect a little light leak from the door when I loaded the bulk roll in the loader, i hope my film won't have too much of a base fog, we'll see !)
NB: Got the Delta 400, the results should be pretty nice and sharp (I hope)
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?