Interestingly, I abandoned Acros when I moved to 4x5 because I found HP5 and FP4 gave me the look I was looking for. Now for 35mm, the new emulsions really shine, but for good old sheet film, back to the standard bearers.
Good old D76 and HP5+
-
A
- Thread starter Thomas Bertilsson
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
Want to Buy 35mmx100 ft developing spiral
- Started by MCB18
-
For Sale Krauss Tessar Zeiss 150mm f/4.5 (France, c1919)
- Started by Manual Camera
-
For Sale For Sale: 35mm ƒ/2.8 Olympus OM Shift Lens - Clean, complete. $200
- Started by Kodachromeguy
-
Want to Buy WTB: Pentax LX for parts, or.
- Started by dirkfletcher
-
For Sale FS: Voigtlander Helomar 240mm f/3.5 Lens
- Started by B.S.Kumar
Forum statistics
- Threads
- 199,833
- Messages
- 2,797,452
- Members
- 100,048
- Latest member
- Praktica_enjoyer
- Recent bookmarks
- 0
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2010
- Messages
- 9,383
- Format
- 4x5 Format
Welcome to D-76 Thomas. I might have guessed that you would find it works well for you, because you have your established style.
Klainmeister, I like your thought "it performs just like it should" - keep using what works for you.
Lately I've been in an "I can't tell the difference" kind of mood. I'll try something completely different, and it comes out just the same.
I should clarify, I can literally "tell" that it's different. What I can't tell is whether it's "better" - it all looks good to me.
Klainmeister, I like your thought "it performs just like it should" - keep using what works for you.
Lately I've been in an "I can't tell the difference" kind of mood. I'll try something completely different, and it comes out just the same.
I should clarify, I can literally "tell" that it's different. What I can't tell is whether it's "better" - it all looks good to me.
Dear Fotch.....
What makes you think we copied D76.......? and not the other way around !
Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limted
What makes you think we copied D76.......? and not the other way around !
Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limted
The idea of mood affecting preferences and decisions here is a good one Bill.
OP
OP
Bill Burk said:
Well, thank you!
Bill Burk said:
That's kind of my point. When we find something in a developer that gives us maybe a slight advantage over other developers, does it really improve what we are trying to say?
That last line you wrote basically summarizes my entire idea with D76 and HP5+ - they give absolutely wonderful results. The making of a good photograph is now all up to me, because I have the tools I need. It's a matter of applying instinct, knowledge, experience, fun factor, heart, and brain.
It isn't that I'm saying that HP5+ or D76 is better than other films and developers. I'm saying they are more than good enough.
One of the things that I've found about developers is that they affect how I shoot. I'm testing FP4+ in RolloPyro right now and one of the impressions I have so far is that I'm not going to be able to use it at EI250 as often as I can with DD-X. That's not a failing or disappointment, it just is. It is early days yet but the other impression I have is that I like RolloPyro a bit better for big enlargements. 20x24 ish from 6x7.
Changing my EI changes the way I interact with the world. Gotta think about time and auxiliary light more.
Being able to enlarge more allows me to use a wider camera lens without changing the printed main subject size, that means I might be able to include more context so my composition can be different too.
OP
OP
Do you seriously have time to think about all that when the the moment comes to you where you must be ready to trigger the shutter?
I am, of course, not saying you are wrong, but for me I like to not be thinking about those things. I like my shooting experience to be completely intuitive, to such a degree that I know exactly what to expect and just react on instinct. As soon as I change one single thing in my cameras, film, or other materials, I don't know what to expect anymore, which is an impediment in my world.
I am, of course, not saying you are wrong, but for me I like to not be thinking about those things. I like my shooting experience to be completely intuitive, to such a degree that I know exactly what to expect and just react on instinct. As soon as I change one single thing in my cameras, film, or other materials, I don't know what to expect anymore, which is an impediment in my world.
OP
OP
I still have tons to learn when it comes to printing but I find myself more on your side of the fence than not. Not that I don't like changing things once in awhile but not all the time, and usually not my film or developer.
Though I have to admit, I have been having a bit of fun with some Adox RPX25 in my Ikoflex Favorit lately. But still souped in D76.
OP
OP
Nothing wrong with having some fun that way either. It's all good. Foremost I think photography is about having a good time. Beyond that I just want to be able to focus on how my projects end up. I find that it's much easier to photograph a project by using exactly the same materials for everything within the boundaries of the project. It ends up looking cohesive that way.
But if I'm just shooting for fun, I don't mind putting a roll of something different through my camera, particularly if I'm on a tripod and I have some time.
You're channeling HCB well here.
There are times when I like having things intuitive also.
Then there are times when I like to consider and setup a shot more like I might if I were painting.
A while back I was really keen on Rodinal for fast films [eg Kodak 2475!]....lots of grain but interesting look for the right subjects.It's important to look at as many people's work as possible to get a feel for what works and why.
OP
OP
HCB. I was watching one of Fred Picker's videos the other day, and confess I would be forced to kill myself if I went about it the way he did.
Well, I had assumed so because its been sold by Kodak for so long. However, please, for the sake of accuracy, when did Ilford first introduce it vs Kodak? For the record, I have both products in my darkroom.
While you seem to have settled comfortably into single syntax, for expressing your ideas; I'm being a bit multi-lingual, still having fun flirting with the foreign girls, so-to-speak.
OP
OP
The girls are the pictures, the subject matter, the light, the expressions, etc.
Funny analogy. I wouldn't call my work single syntax. I have at least twelve projects stretching from pinhole landscapes to portraits, architecture, and automobiles. My materials are single syntax, though. Which I appreciate. And that's probably what you meant.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2014
- Messages
- 495
- Format
- Medium Format
Interesting discussion!
My thoughts on this is that very inexperienced photographers start shooting entirely intuitevely. A lot of people maytake great shots like this, even if there are technical flaws.
Then, as your understanding of the medium increases, much more thought will go into each shot.
At some point, the photohrapher may realise that he is over-thinking the shots. They may seem technically better but less lively and interesting.
To cure that the photographer will try to get back to a more intuitive way of shooting.
But as you become more intuitive again, the thought processes will still be there, leading to better intuition than before.
It's a long way from the first post but as the OP raised it, I reckon it's ok
Last edited by a moderator:
OP
OP
Interesting discussion!
My thoughts on this is that very inexperienced photographers start shooting entirely intuitevely.
Then, as your understanding of the medium increases, much more thought will go into each shot.
At some point, the photohrapher may realise that he is over-thinking the shots. They may seem technically better but less lively and interesting.
To cure that the photographer will try to get back to a more intuitive way of shooting.
But as you become more intuitive again, the thought processes will still be there, leading to better intuition than before.
It's a long way from the first post but as the OP raised it, I reckon it's ok
You have good insight in how experience works. I would just call it hard work, and I do think there's a curiosity in photographers who explore film to try different things. Kind of like growing up we go through stages of development where we end up understanding more and more what we appreciate in life, but also developing the confidence to act it out and to be truthful about who we are and what we want to be (I'm not talking about a career here). We try some things and they don't work, and then we try some things that do work. Sort of like a discussion, where some arguments make sense and we adopt them into our ways of thinking, and others don't and we leave those by the wayside.
But at some point I guess it's not a bad idea to maybe look beyond those things and reach further. My point is that your choice of materials can only take you so far before you have to start digging deeper than those mechanical and surface things and really get into why we're making photographs, what they should express, and how do we best do that. And I can't help but think that we get farther in that realm if we have to look to our heart, mind, soul, conscience, and intellect to progress. I mean with HP5 and D76 alone you can achieve a thousand different looks. Want sharp? Go 1+3 and develop for a long time. Want smooth fine grain? Develop with stock developer. Underexpose, overexpose, underdevelop, overdevelop. Use filters of different sorts to play with color rendition, and if you work in a studio the possibilities with light are endless. The variety of results that are possible with just one film and one developer is staggering.
Anyway, I am about to take a vacation from APUG. I really should be in my darkroom making prints.
Have fun!
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 14,253
- Format
- 8x10 Format
It always amazes me how people keep making the argument that if so and so used a particular film and developer so successfully, why look
elsewhere. I gave up on 76 for HP5 a long time ago. Call me lazy, but I don't like doing things the hard way, and for some strange reason,
just don't like throwing out more test prints than I need to, or having to constantly attach a sheet film mask to bring the shadows and highlights
within reasonable reach. I know how to do all these things. You betcha. But once I started using pyro developers, it all became sooooo much
easier.
elsewhere. I gave up on 76 for HP5 a long time ago. Call me lazy, but I don't like doing things the hard way, and for some strange reason,
just don't like throwing out more test prints than I need to, or having to constantly attach a sheet film mask to bring the shadows and highlights
within reasonable reach. I know how to do all these things. You betcha. But once I started using pyro developers, it all became sooooo much
easier.
OP
OP
And I gave up on pyro developers because I very much dislike the print quality I could muster. To me the developers didn't offer anything that improved my photographs. They did not speak louder to the observer, were more difficult to print, and the tonality was something I was not happy with.
It's far easier for me to obtain a good print with D76 or Xtol than PMK or Pyrocat. Go figure, you betcha.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |