Good b&w portrait film?

[avaron]

Paper/Film Combination for Portraiture

I conducted a series of tests about three years ago on 120 film, specifically evaluating caucasian skin. FP4 printed on Oriental Seagull RC Pearl beat everything else. I didn't test fast films. Delta 100 shows every facial defect. Plus-X so obscures detail that you start to lose a sense of line. FP4 shows just enough detail to give texture without emphasizing defects. I tested three other VC papers, Foma FB , Kentmere FB, and Ilford MG RC Pearl. Foma gave acceptable results, Kentmere less so, with Ilford MG yielding nothing but paste.
You can use Delta 100 with an orange filter and achieve results similar to FP4.
I developed in XTOL on a Jobo CPP-2 for 5 minutes at 24 degrees C. With the subject wearing bright white, 4.5 minutes works better.
I tested only 8x10 (from 6x6 negative).

 

[rwboyer]

I conducted a series of tests about three years ago on 120 film, specifically evaluating caucasian skin. FP4 printed on Oriental Seagull RC Pearl beat everything else. I didn't test fast films. Delta 100 shows every facial defect. Plus-X so obscures detail that you start to lose a sense of line. FP4 shows just enough detail to give texture without emphasizing defects. I tested three other VC papers, Foma FB , Kentmere FB, and Ilford MG RC Pearl. Foma gave acceptable results, Kentmere less so, with Ilford MG yielding nothing but paste.
You can use Delta 100 with an orange filter and achieve results similar to FP4.
I developed in XTOL on a Jobo CPP-2 for 5 minutes at 24 degrees C. With the subject wearing bright white, 4.5 minutes works better.
I tested only 8x10 (from 6x6 negative).

Well then I guess we should stop usin everythin that we all r usin caus it must be really sucky an star usin wut use is usin. Cuz notin beats wut u figured on.

RB
;-)

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

How do you adjust agitation with a Jobo?

You don't choose your paper to the film. You choose film based on what paper you have and match your film processing according to what the paper needs to yield a print that you like. It starts with the paper, and its developer. Everything else is a decision based on that.

RB, took me a while to decipher that... Funny.

I conducted a series of tests about three years ago on 120 film, specifically evaluating caucasian skin. FP4 printed on Oriental Seagull RC Pearl beat everything else. I didn't test fast films. Delta 100 shows every facial defect. Plus-X so obscures detail that you start to lose a sense of line. FP4 shows just enough detail to give texture without emphasizing defects. I tested three other VC papers, Foma FB , Kentmere FB, and Ilford MG RC Pearl. Foma gave acceptable results, Kentmere less so, with Ilford MG yielding nothing but paste.
You can use Delta 100 with an orange filter and achieve results similar to FP4.
I developed in XTOL on a Jobo CPP-2 for 5 minutes at 24 degrees C. With the subject wearing bright white, 4.5 minutes works better.
I tested only 8x10 (from 6x6 negative).

 

[rwboyer]

How do you adjust agitation with a Jobo?

You don't choose your paper to the film. You choose film based on what paper you have and match your film processing according to what the paper needs to yield a print that you like. It starts with the paper, and its developer. Everything else is a decision based on that.

RB, took me a while to decipher that... Funny.

Well you ya know.... There are certain horses, no matter how dead they are, people just can't stop beatin' on um.

RB

Ps. You know what happens when you start to take yourself too seriously? You drop wet negatives into the kitty litter. Happens to me all the time.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Yeah, beating dead horses became a hobby of mine during this thread, though. The reason I did it and stuck with it is that I find that people put too much emphasis on the film and equipment and the perfect choices. The magic comes from within, from practice, having fun, feeling your way, and letting the subject matter come to you. Forcing results with the perfect lens or perfect film I have been against for a good long time now.

So my apologies to all the dead horses out there, but this one was worth beating some more. It's about getting you out of your comfort zone, analyze your behavior, and see if you have a strong enough case to continue the way you are, to look at things from a different angle.
The same thing was done for me a couple of years ago now, and my results have improved drastically since, as far as being able to fully realize what I see and feel when I'm at the moment of exposing the film, and translating that into a print without much fuss, tweaking, or having to print my brains out to get to where I want to be with it. It's easy now, the negs practically print themselves, and it really works, all while not having to choose any materials, I just adjust contrast on the fly.

Have you ever dropped negs in bunny poo?

 

[moouers]

The magic comes from within, from practice, having fun, feeling your way, and letting the subject matter come to you.

I totally agree. That "magic bullet" people are looking for...they already have it. They just need to understand how to see and discern their unique vision in the first place.

 

[removed-user-1]

I've played with a lot of different films over the years. Lately I've shot a few rolls of TMax 400 CN (the C-41 film) and I like it. But, I keep coming back to Plus-X for 35mm and Tri-X 320 and the occasional roll of Pan-F for medium format, for almost all my B+W shooting. I've made some very nice portraits with all of these.

 

[rwboyer]

Yeah, beating dead horses became a hobby of mine during this thread, though. The reason I did it and stuck with it is that I find that people put too much emphasis on the film and equipment and the perfect choices. The magic comes from within, from practice, having fun, feeling your way, and letting the subject matter come to you. Forcing results with the perfect lens or perfect film I have been against for a good long time now.

So my apologies to all the dead horses out there, but this one was worth beating some more. It's about getting you out of your comfort zone, analyze your behavior, and see if you have a strong enough case to continue the way you are, to look at things from a different angle.
The same thing was done for me a couple of years ago now, and my results have improved drastically since, as far as being able to fully realize what I see and feel when I'm at the moment of exposing the film, and translating that into a print without much fuss, tweaking, or having to print my brains out to get to where I want to be with it. It's easy now, the negs practically print themselves, and it really works, all while not having to choose any materials, I just adjust contrast on the fly.

Have you ever dropped negs in bunny poo?

Nope no other kinds of poo but I really really did drop a roll of wet 120 negatives just out of the soup (the were important ones) in the kitty litter box one time. Long story but I was taking myself way too seriously and that incident for a moment elevated my stress level to a point of breakage and I actually ended up laughing at the end of a 10 minute raving lunatic fit.

The prints turned out fantastic - I never told the client.

RB

Ps. I wonder if that is the secret ingredient I haven't dropped any wet negs in kitty litter lately.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Hey RB,

I think we'll leave the secret poo ingredient to science fiction... But I'm glad it worked out for you.

I wonder if it's repeatable, to drop the negs in kitty litter to insure fantastic print quality.

- Thomas

 

[GraemeMitchell]

I vote to shoot what your comfortable with, make everything as simple as you possibly can. Take all the attention you want to put into things like that, like film and f-stops and, and even the light, and then direct it to the person you're photographing. Make something live between you and them, make it as straight and perfect as you can, and let nothing bend it or break it.