Film noir 'look' - suitable film?

[analoguey]

I am looking to shoot more in the noir sense - dark, contrasty, Moody.

I understand that managing lighting is important/fundamental - I am looking for suggestions on which film would retain highlight and detail in shadows as well.

Any suggestions on film - 120, 4x5 as well as any other input would be much appreciated. As well as what paper might suit such printing.

I would be using either xtol or dektol. Also have some Ilford chemistry, but will be principally using xtol.

 

[Tom1956]

I wouldn't think too much about this film or that. For what you're trying to do, the film is whatever you need for the lighting involved. The effect you're going after is irrespective of film type, and more the so-called "art" of it. Especially in a static photograph, rather than motion picture film, which the term "film noir" is commonly thought of.

 

[analoguey]

For the overall look, yes, but smooth tonality, and showing good detail high-contrast images (portraits especially)- wouldnt that require films characteristics to be (set) in certain ways? Or I maybe development to be slightly altered?

Sent from Tap-a-talk

 

[Kawaiithulhu]

Detail in the shadows, you must come from some Bizarro(tm) noir universe

 

[Tom1956]

I'm only one person, who presently is the first and only respondent so far to your post. There will be more. As for me, I still think the effect you're after is not something of film, or "high contrast" necessarily. The hardest thing thing there is to do as a photographer is to put everything you've ever seen, labeled "noir", out of your head and do your own stuff. I'm not sure I'm communicating or making sense. But try not to be a copycat. And that's a hard thing to do, a lot of the time.

 

[Nuff]

From the little bit I know about film noir look, there's very little shadow detail and it's all about black black and black...
Film characteristics don't have much to do with it. You will need a spot meter and know your lights very well and control them.
Place your blacks at -3EV and then go from there, also it's pretty high contrast look too.

 

[summicron1]

dark and moody? Low key stuff, lots of dark with a few dimly lit highlights --- if you want the widest possible tonality you either need to master the zone system OR shoot with Ilford XP2, which has about the widest tonal scale capture ability I've ever seen. Rate it at 400 and underexpose a bit. Your images will come out dark but still hold detail.

a lot also depends on printing -- just print a bit dark, there you are.

 

[Kawaiithulhu]

The classic look is three things: dramatic poses + dutch angles + dark shadows

Stills of the period were mostly 8x10 glossies, ferrotyped mercilessly, sharply focused with no pictorialism hints or matte papers at all.

 

[Tom1956]

"Mercilessly ferrotyped". That's a wild one. How can you ferrotype"mercilessly"? You fix it in hardening fixer, wash, soak it in photo-flo solution, slap it on the tin, and roll it out with the print roller. Is there another way less or more merciful?

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

It's not merciless without Pakosol.

As everyone else is saying, a lot of that effect is light, but use an old school film. I've gotten results like that with Efke PL100 in 4x5" pushed one stop in Acufine and direct flash on the camera, Weegee style.

I think the current version of that film is Adox CHS 100.

 

[snapguy]

I'd use a slow film with rich black and never,,never light the subject from the front. You need tough guys and brassy dames and dark, means streets and settings. And don't forget mournful jazz to be played when people view your photos. Get John Huston as your advisor.

 

[markbarendt]

Tom is right, it's not about a special film or special developing or special paper.

It's the lighting.

 

[polyglot]

The "noir" look is IMHO largely a loss of shadow detail and probably highlights too. Consider the poor films (by todays standards) that they were shooting with in the 50s, so very little dynamic range in comparison to modern films.

I'd use a traditional grain film, under-expose and push. Maybe abuse some Adox CHS 50/100 or Pan-F.

 

[gone]

I don't think there's any question as to the film to use. Use Tri-X, and if it were me I would develop it in D76. Your metering could be pretty sloppy and you'll still get great images. But try xtol if that's what you have. Ix nay on the ektol day. Too over the top, and you won't get a film noir look. And yes, your lighting and composition need to be appropriate. Watch some old noir movies and get a feel for that look. The first think you'll notice is the lighting. They knew what they were doing.

 

[Alan Klein]

Convention of film, noir http://www.slideshare.net/JAKEEKNIGHT/conevtions-of-film-noir is more than lighting but style and content as well.

 

[markbarendt]

Agreed Alan.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

I doubt that you will be completely successful for the type of film with the necessary "imperfections" is no longer made. Notice that I put imperfections in quotes. What I mean is such things as a large variation of grain size in the emulsion which created a wide film latitude. Modern emulsions lack this quality since they are designed for a more even grain size. Another "imperfection" would be emulsion thickness which was large in comparison to today's films and caused light scatter in the image. There are also several other factors all of which are lacking today.

 

[Tom1956]

Another thing that is lacking is that they don't make the 1958 Plymouth Savoy any more. Smoking has been banned in the night clubs, and Henry Mancini is long dead. So what can a super-cool private eye do under those conditions?

 

[Tom Duffy]

Convention of film, noir http://www.slideshare.net/JAKEEKNIGHT/conevtions-of-film-noir is more than lighting but style and content as well.

Really good web reference. Thanks for sharing it.

 

[Kawaiithulhu]

Still plenty of places in Los Angeles with the requisite ambiance and while noir's home base is urban, plenty of it strays away from downtown and into suburban/untamed areas where brutal action happens before everyone heads back to the city.

And it's entirely possible to go for a noir look in modern settings, just harder to make it recognizably "noir" and not "edgy style of the month."

PS: plenty of "night" scenes are shot in daylight: http://www.videomaker.com/article/8150-hollywoods-dark-secret-shooting-day-for-night

 

[analoguey]

As for me, I still think the effect you're after is not something of film, or "high contrast" necessarily. The hardest thing thing there is to do as a photographer is to put everything you've ever seen, labeled "noir", out of your head and do your own stuff. I'm not sure I'm communicating or making sense. But try not to be a copycat. And that's a hard thing to do, a lot of the time.

You are right - I am after a contrasty moody look, but with smooth tonality, not jumpy-grainy. I kind of thought that "film noir" best explained it - maybe, maybe not.

The classic look is three things: dramatic poses + dutch angles + dark shadows
.

Hmm, thanks - what are dutch angles?

Convention of film, noir http://www.slideshare.net/JAKEEKNIGHT/conevtions-of-film-noir is more than lighting but style and content as well.

Thanks for that link Alan - I am not sure if what I am after will completely slot in - but if it doesn't I will definitely know where it's differing.


----

Will any B&W paper do for the printing? Assuming I am shooting 120 or 4x5?

 

[Xmas]

http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/cameras-photography/tips/5-film-noir-photography-tips.htm

try Formapan 400 in Rodinal for nice grain.

 

[markbarendt]

Dutching is a movie term. Tilting the camera so that the horizon is askew.

Contrast is fully adjustable with most any film and single bath developer and there's plenty of printing control, so no one film has a clear edge here. Developing to a harder contrast does IMO make for harder tonal changes though with any film. Normal development will look smoother.

Slower films and/or larger formats are both good bets to keep grain unobtrusive and can record finer detail which makes for smoother tonal changes.

Still think lighting is the biggest part of the equation, especially if you have a film that gives you good tones now.

 

[analoguey]

Thanks Mark, I understand.
I was positing that if I have fixed the lighting situation, what might be the best film/dev method and/or best paper/printing to choose from.
(not that I *have* fixed the lighting bit right now - it anyways is case by case, but I am somewhere on the way)

 

[markbarendt]

Thanks Mark, I understand.
I was positing that if I have fixed the lighting situation, what might be the best film/dev method and/or best paper/printing to choose from.
(not that I *have* fixed the lighting bit right now - it anyways is case by case, but I am somewhere on the way)

The short answer is that there aren't any magic bullets to be had, it's all about you.