Film combination satisfactory

Hi again,

It has been long time since i posted here, been busy and still am.

Well, don't know if this has been discussed before or has similar threads here or there, i just want to give it one more go and see what will be saying this time, and let not turn it into cross firing opinions rather than giving different opinions without negative attitude or say with more respect to each.

So, i am not doing film much since i started few years ago, so i have no much experiences yet, but i always follow and trust my eyes of what i see, and what i see about film is just, ..... more confusing endings.

I look at many different films results using different developers, and at the end, all are almost very good to me, so i want to know, where is bad then? what is the point to do many experimenting with combo of film and developer if at the end it will give nice results no matter how it look like, i used 8 B&W films and 4 developers only, and 99% of the results are so nice, and those that i may accept less still nice to be used, so where i want to end up or what are people looking for in B&W? more sharp? less grainy? less contrast or more of it? better shadows? better whatever or less of this and that? at the end i feel it is only subjective and each one trying to think that his combo or her results are great enough.

The funny thing is, i remember the first time ever i developed film first time, it was during a workshop i took with other people, and i remember we weren't so accurate about timing much, and the water was so hot maybe above 28C, and at the end we all got film developed and something out there, and we printed few frames and they were nice, so even with mistakes we got results mostly nice unless the exposure was wrong from beginning, so now if i want to return back to shoot film, what i should think about? no project in mind, but let's say if i have a project or shoot for fun, then what combo should i do? o just keep experimenting?

With digital, i just choose the setting of camera and shoot, i never worry about results, while with film, i have to worry about which film, and which developer, and which printing, pushing or not, time of developing, dilution or not,....etc, and if something is wrong then we don't know where we should correct, is it the developing time, is it the developer, is the film, is it the fixer,.....?!!!

So, when you are satisfied in film? and what is your satisfaction based on? and do you care about what you want or what others need to see/think? forget about which format gear you use, it is about film and developing process i am talking about, when you think it is ok for you, or do you just force yourself to accept it for a reason or no reason?

Excuse my language, but hope my points are there, and forget about grammar or whatever English rules, just post if have something to post or just read/watch.

Appreciate all opinions, but again, with respect and no need to enforcing opinions on each other, variation is part of beauty if good.

In some ways, you have answered your own question. If you are happy with 99% of the film/developer combinations, then just choose one and go for it.

Kevin Caulfield said:

In some ways, you have answered your own question. If you are happy with 99% of the film/developer combinations, then just choose one and go for it.

Click to expand...

It is not just that, i can use say at least 3 developers and 3 film combos and i am happy with all, then i don't know what to choose, but let's say i will choose one and go with one, then why so many developers and film then? i don't think having 10 developers there with 20 film most likely they are at same EI/ASA/ISO value if it will give happy results, let's say if i use Acros 100 and Delta 100 and TMAX 100 and i get all nice results out of them, then why to have all of them in production and even more from other brands like Foma and Arista? and some other film are discontinued, it is like there is no one answer to it, it is open, you tell me i can go with one if i ma almost happy, which ones you think to choose?

Why so many different cars, knives, bicycles, husbands, wives, trousers ... ?



Different people like different things, plus of course that is how pluralistic capitalistic market economies work ...


How is any choice between "competing" options made?

pdeeh said:

Why so many different cars, knives, bicycles, husbands, wives, trousers ... ?



Different people like different things, plus of course that is how pluralistic capitalistic market economies work ...


How is any choice between "competing" options made?

Click to expand...

This is a good and logic answer, thanks!

Well, we have limits there too, i can't have many wives more than 4 anyway, and women here can't get more than 1 husband anyway, about cars, it is first about money, if money allowing then it comes which car, i still have that damn car that is giving me headache more and i can't afford new and can't sell it either, so there is no options.

With film market, i don't know if it is shrinking or increasing, i don't know how many B&W films out there in the past say 20-100 years ago than now, or how many developers as well, but i can say it is like food as well, we choose what we like, but are we keep experimenting many different food? i don't, and at the end i don't know why i keep experimenting what i see many here and there doing, i feel like they are trying to find the ultimate combo but they keep being happy what whatever they think it is right.

it is because everyone wants to say and do something different, even though they might be doing .... the exact same thing.

A few years ago Kodak sold five black & white 35mm consumer films producing distinctly different results: T-Max 100, T-Max 400, T-Max 3200, High Speed Infrared, and Tech Pan. Several competing companies also produced a variety of films. Just one film and developer were enough for many photographers. Others needed several different films to satisfy widely different situations. I've used all of the above mentioned Kodak films. Large format infrared film was much more satisfactory than the Kodak product in 35mm. The other four Kodak films were excellent in appropriate applications, but were unsuitable for other uses.

jnanian said:

it is because everyone wants to say and do something different, even though they might be doing .... the exact same thing.

Click to expand...

Yes, this is a good approach, to be different isn't wrong, healthy i can say, and it is understandable, it is just sometimes i feel that why people keep doing things with same films or developers as they didn't find the answer yet, but your point is good one, i may use different film than you to be different, but if i use same your film and same developer it is mostly i want to have same results as you, some accept it, but some don't.

Jim Jones said:

A few years ago Kodak sold five black & white 35mm consumer films producing distinctly different results: T-Max 100, T-Max 400, T-Max 3200, High Speed Infrared, and Tech Pan. Several competing companies also produced a variety of films. Just one film and developer were enough for many photographers. Others needed several different films to satisfy widely different situations. I've used all of the above mentioned Kodak films. Large format infrared film was much more satisfactory than the Kodak product in 35mm. The other four Kodak films were excellent in appropriate applications, but were unsuitable for other uses.

Click to expand...

At least i started with TMAX 100 and 400, and i am happy with both, they are one of my favorite B&W film actually, wanted to use TMAX 3200 but i was late, they are gone in large format or MF [120], and i don't shoot 35mm.

To me, the situation will not control my film, but i try to control the situation with my film, so if i have TMAX 100 and TMAX 400 i can do alot in many situations, only if i needed more exposure sensitive because very low light then simply i don't shoot at that condition or just i use digital, but thank GOD Ilford have Delta 3200 for MF, i don't use LF so i won't miss it, i can use 400ASA film and push it to nearly 1600-3200 if needed.

So, yes, different situations or conditions is a good reason for different films or combo, i agree, i may prefer one film over another for a reason, but again, when you can say what you get is satisfactory enough? i mean when do you know that what you get is what you want? if no mistakes? if nice results? if something in particular that defined your result as successful?

it is not complex and it is great to have the selection. I like traditional grain for black & white. I like the colors of Portra. I like to have consistent film speeds for both black & white and color. Therefore I use Tri-X 400 [Ilford HP5+ for 4"x5" since Tri-X is not available in 400 ISO] and Portra 400. I like the results of replenished XTOL. There all my decisions are made for most situations.

Sirius Glass said:

it is not complex and it is great to have the selection. I like traditional grain for black & white. I like the colors of Portra. I like to have consistent film speeds for both black & white and color. Therefore I use Tri-X 400 [Ilford HP5+ for 4"x5" since Tri-X is not available in 400 ISO] and Portra 400. I like the results of replenished XTOL. There all my decisions are made for most situations.

Click to expand...

Yes, as long you are happy with that then this is the point, i think or feel you tried many combo so far until you reach to this one you like, and you mentioned why you like it, so this is the what i mean, i may still keep testing different films, but i already found my combo that i am happy about it, and i just learn when testing more, actually if i didn't test before i may end up with 1 combo that may not be the best i can have.

For color i am still not sure about Portra as i didn't shoot with them yet, i have the film, but i was shooting mostly with Reala which is my top best but it is gone for 120 format, and Ektar giving me like a bi-feeling, i like it in some scenarios but in another i don't like, Reala is nearly so natural so i like it in all cases, Ektar i feel it give me some kind of warmish tone/cast in some scenes so that i can't put it as my top favorite color neg yet, but i hope that Portra will give me something i like as Reala, i saw many results out of Portra, almost very nice, but there is one problem only with color, i never developed color film by myself even it can be done at home and many telling me it is not that hard, i will wait until i can afford a processor then i will shoot film more.

Actually when i started this thread i was more thinking about why this film is your choice or that developer is your favorite, everybody wants something different i accept it, but different should be something we like too, not just different and the result isn't what we want, if you choose a combo and the result is fabulous amazing then i can give it a try and use it if it is what i want or give me what i like, no need to be different all the time, maybe the combo i like some like it too, but i can't finalize if i can have more than 1 combination of film+developer that will give me great results, for example:

TMAX dev + TMAX 400 = incredibly sharp, nice tone of grey
Acros 100 + HC110 = finest grain, also razor sharp
Ilford PanF 50 + Ilfosol 3 = very pleasing contrast, sharp

So as above, 3 different films and 3 different developers i used, all gave me nice results one or another, i tried Delta 100, didn't like it much in 2 developers although i am sure it is an amazing film, honesty when i look at delta films i feel like it is not as that original vintage B&W as it should be, something giving me a feeling that it is like digitalized B&W or new updated B&W and lost the originality a bit, but i can be wrong completely, but when i look at TMAX film and Acros 100 i feel i don't want to use anything else, and also i said before that i always prefer ready concentrate liquid developers than powdered to mix, honestly i didn't like D-76 much over TMAX or HC-110, but many recommend this developer to be almost as first choice or even to start with, even Tri-X wasn't a film that i swear about it regardless i see too many put it as almost top or highly recommended film.

So, i would like to know more about many members experiences about why they chose whatever they choose.

Having too many films and developers to choose from is a very nice problem to have. This is one problem I hope we all have for a very long time.

There is a difference between being happy with the result and achieving the result as envisioned .

In other words, even though there are many film with the same ISO and film-developer combination that produce satisfactory results, they do not end with equivalent result.

We develop and experiment with new formulas and techniques to see if we can push the frontier further and expand our toolset.

Sometimes I like more grain, so I go with a film known for its grain... sometimes I don't want to see any grain whatsoever... so... Sometimes I want very luminous shadows, so...HP5! Sometimes I want the IR look so I use an IR fim (still have several sheets of Efke IR 8x10).... Then there's the developer consideration. Either Pyrocat or a Rodinal derivative.

Just remember that you can change the exposure and development of any film to change it's contrast to match the scene (coincidence is probably where any preferences come from, unless you do a lot of testing), and that the largest part of a 'look' come from what you do in the darkroom when printing.

Great, and i agree, i mentioned that even for similar ISO films i may not prefer all of them, i said i like Acros 100 and TMAX 400, and didn't like Delta film, so Acros vs. Delta 100 i will always choose Acros, TMAX 400 and Delta 400, no question here, TMAX all the way for me, and so on.

I know i may change the film contrast somehow by playing with exposure/development changes, but i am not this kind of guy of trying different development things much, also with exposure i can do that but i prefer to preset my exposure, i have a meter that i can use for exposure reading, also i can use my any digital camera to determine the closer exposure time for a scene, so by this way i don't waste time much in playing with exposure much, i was once with a landscape photographer, he was shooting with film only [MF], and he always using a meter so he didn't want to play much with exposure, though he doesn't shoot with B&W, but the idea for him is to have the exposure right first time than having it right later in development or darkroom.