Film choice in B&W

[TareqPhoto]

I didn't read the website yet to see if this question has been asked before [which i think it is already in any film website or forum].

What is the best or recommended B&W film for: Landscapes, Portraits, general [candid, outdoor, indoor,....]

 

[bumbersdad]

It's a matter of preference. I prefer a slower film with fine grain (in most cases). The worst thing about slower film is windy days...

 

[TareqPhoto]

It's a matter of preference. I prefer a slower film with fine grain (in most cases). The worst thing about slower film is windy days...

Hi mate

Great, this a good help, so why slower film? sure you have a reason that you prefer the slower film

 

[bumbersdad]

I do. The fine grain is, to me, more satisfying. I also use two lenses in barrel, so longer exposure times are necessary. I know, Jim Galli can do an eighth of a second pretty accurately without a shutter, but I can't. So I use small apertures and slower film so that I can make longer exposures. I'm currently gnawing away at a 500 foot roll of Panatomic Arecon. I've figured out how to use it pretty well and overcome its shortcomings; I'm using a basic EI of 20. I use that in my 4x5, and there's no visible grain at all.

 

[keithwms]

I didn't read the website yet to see if this question has been asked before [which i think it is already in any film website or forum].

What is the best or recommended B&W film for: Landscapes, Portraits, general [candid, outdoor, indoor,....]

Answers will vary widely (and they should).

For me.... recently...

Landscapes: pan f, pan 25, Rollei superpan....

Portraits: any of the deltas or tmaxes, chromogenics (xp2), pyro-developed stuff in general

General: fp4+, hp5+ in D76/ID11, 1+1

Just experiment and have fun!

 

[mooseontheloose]

Tareq -- I think you'll get a lot of different answers from a lot of different people. I know it's tempting to want to try a lot of different films (I've been there myself) but it would probably be best to stick to one (or two) emulsions for now. Maybe one high speed and one low. I started with Tri-X (400), developed in D-76 because that is a classic, classic combination and I've had very good results with it. I now mostly use HP5+ (from Ilford, very similar to Tri-X) because it was more readily available (and cheaper) in Europe when I was living there. For 100 speed film I tried a bunch of different ones before settling on Fuji Acros 100. These are the two films I use 90% of the time -- I've been using them for a few years now (well, the Acros for less than a year) and I'm happy with what I have been getting. If you don't like grain you might try Kodak TMAX films or the Delta ones from Ilford.

In all honesty, I don't think it's necessary to have a bunch of different films for different subjects, especially if you are just beginning. Pick a film, shoot it -- all subjects, all lighting conditions -- and figure out what you like and don't like. Then you can try other films, once you know what you are looking for.

 

[Cainquixote]

the best one is the one your comfortable using and developing

 

[mooseontheloose]

Good point!

Tareq -- are you going to develop the film yourself, or have it developed at a lab? That will make a difference in the recommendations I think.

 

[John Kasaian]

Its "Horses for courses" If you feel the need for speed, or if you're wrestling with reciprocity. or if you want ruddy skin tones there's a film for you---but you've got to choose.
FP-4+ or TXP are good "all-rounders" IMHO.

 

[TareqPhoto]

Yes, i will experiment different film and see, sure to each film i will get results and grain as i want and depends on the ASA and developing processing, ok, we will see.

 

[TareqPhoto]

Tareq -- I think you'll get a lot of different answers from a lot of different people. I know it's tempting to want to try a lot of different films (I've been there myself) but it would probably be best to stick to one (or two) emulsions for now. Maybe one high speed and one low. I started with Tri-X (400), developed in D-76 because that is a classic, classic combination and I've had very good results with it. I now mostly use HP5+ (from Ilford, very similar to Tri-X) because it was more readily available (and cheaper) in Europe when I was living there. For 100 speed film I tried a bunch of different ones before settling on Fuji Acros 100. These are the two films I use 90% of the time -- I've been using them for a few years now (well, the Acros for less than a year) and I'm happy with what I have been getting. If you don't like grain you might try Kodak TMAX films or the Delta ones from Ilford.

In all honesty, I don't think it's necessary to have a bunch of different films for different subjects, especially if you are just beginning. Pick a film, shoot it -- all subjects, all lighting conditions -- and figure out what you like and don't like. Then you can try other films, once you know what you are looking for.

I agree and i know that
I will start with T-Max ISO 100 that i will use with holga, and i took out TMY-ISO400 to be nest B&W film.

 

[TareqPhoto]

the best one is the one your comfortable using and developing

In fact i will not develop film myself now, just i will scan it, later when i will be more comfortable or more get used to film then i will start to develop myself.

 

[TareqPhoto]

Good point!

Tareq -- are you going to develop the film yourself, or have it developed at a lab? That will make a difference in the recommendations I think.

Developed at a lab, not ready now to develop film myself but i will scan it by myself.