How did you choose your film?

[Danner]

I've settled on Ilford products exclusively, film, chemistry, and paper (with one exception) because it seems to me that Ilford is dedicated to the craft and offers a full product line. I want to support them for that reason. The one exception is that I like XTOL too much to give it up, so I get Kodak XTOL when I can, and use ECO Pro ascorbic acid equivalent when I can't.

That said, I'm a big fan of FP4 and HP5 for most everything I shoot.

My 2¢

 

[awty]

I hate repartition, so I constantly chop and change....only in chaos can I be creative.

 

[markjwyatt]

I hate repartition, so I constantly chop and change....only in chaos can I be creative.

"repetition"? Variety is the spice of life.

 

[awty]

"repetition"? Variety is the spice of life.

Say something once, why say it again.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

"repetition"? Variety is the spice of life.

I prefer the actual images to be the variety, not the process to get them, that’s just me though.

 

[markjwyatt]

I prefer the actual images to be the variety, not the process to get them, that’s just me though.

True, for me I usually shoot one, or maybe two (if uncertain of the first) images of a given scene anyway, but agree with the concept.

 

[braxus]

Im all over the map when it comes to choosing films. I like variety, but I do have 4 favorite B&W films. I mentioned these in another post. It doesn't bother me why I have such a varied selection, as I have never really had bad results with any of them. Some with film fog maybe, but thats about it. I develop my own B&W now (after a 27 year absence). I shoot everything from 35mm, 120, 4x5, 5x7, up to 8x10. I use the largest formats less, and 35mm less then 120. Medium format is my go to most of the time. I took photo courses in both high school and college, and learned on film. I use digital now as well, along with my film cameras.

 

[SchwinnParamount]

A much overblown philosophy, by the way.

Right! In the same way a master chef can reproduce amazing courses from any of the recipes in his cookbook, a photographer can regularly produce amazing work from any combinations of film/developer he is familiar with.

 

[SchwinnParamount]

I prefer the actual images to be the variety, not the process to get them, that’s just me though.

Yep. It isn't just you.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

Yep. It isn't just you.

lol... I didn’t think it was. Variety is nice, and trying out different films is a lot of fun early on, but, for, me, I pretty quickly reached a point where I just want to shoot and want a simple, easy, and reliable way to predictably get there. I’m in somewhat of a unique position because I both sell film, and process it, so pretty much have a fair amount of pretty much every emulsion currently made either actually on hand, or within easy order distance, yet, despite all that, the actual variety of films I regularly shoot is very limited. I have some absolute favorites in the looks department that I almost never shoot because I don’t like how they handle after being processed, and I have films that I love how they handle after being processed, but are just OK in the looks department, yet, I shoot a huge amount of it.

 

[Don_ih]

I constantly chop and change....only in chaos can I be creative.

Same with me. But I know it's exactly the opposite for some people - they need as many variables fixed as possible.

One film that is quite different from others is Foma Retropan. That stuff scans terribly. But I find it enlarges very nicely. It doesn't have grain - it has gravel. It has tones ranging between dark muddy grey and light muddy grey. Every now and then, I shoot a roll to disappoint myself. I think it's a good choice for portraits, though.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

... Variety is nice, and trying out different films is a lot of fun early on, but, for, me, I pretty quickly reached a point where I just want to shoot and want a simple, easy, and reliable way to predictably get there.....

THIS! This, this, this! Too many decisions for me leads to indecision.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

THIS! This, this, this! Too many decisions for me leads to indecision.

this is why many old timers say pick one and stick with it. The reality of the matter is it’s pretty hard to go wrong with any currently produced film in the image quality department for most shooting, so if you assume you’ll get acceptable images if you exposed correctly, and it was processed per manufacturer’s guidelines, that really reduce your decision tree down to deciding color, or BW, then from there, film speed.

for me personally, for color negative, it’s gold 200 and Portra 800 all the way. For BW, it’s generally either fomapan 200, or HP5 plus along with delta 3200. That’s for 35mm.

for 120 roll film, for color negative, the only real choice is Portra 400 and 800. For BW, it’s HP5 and Delta 3200.

for sheet film, it’s HP5, TMAX 400, and Fomapan 400.

inside those choices, the decider most often is film speed and (for 35mm) nostalgia, with sheet film, cost and reciprocity failure.

 

[Sirius Glass]

THIS! This, this, this! Too many decisions for me leads to indecision.

The technical term is Analysis Paralysis

 

[awty]

Same with me. But I know it's exactly the opposite for some people - they need as many variables fixed as possible.

One film that is quite different from others is Foma Retropan. That stuff scans terribly. But I find it enlarges very nicely. It doesn't have grain - it has gravel. It has tones ranging between dark muddy grey and light muddy grey. Every now and then, I shoot a roll to disappoint myself. I think it's a good choice for portraits, though.

What ever floats your boat, theres no wrong or right way, do what suites yourself.
Havent tried the 320 yet, havent seen any pictures using it that draws me to this film, but will give it a go at some point.
Just put in an order for 6 different 35mm films to try. I usually just use hp5 and fp4 cause I have them in the bulk loader. Running low on donner reels, so good opportunity to try something else. Wish 3200 film was available in 100' rolls.
I like to have lots of different ISO film for different projects. Have everything from 25 iso to 3200 in medium format. Large format I just buy what ever is good value.
When ever I do a print I use what ever technique that will get the picture I want, same deal, have dozens of different types of paper, toners, chemistry.

 

[Don_ih]

Havent tried the 320 yet,

Don't bother

 

[awty]

Don't bother

Ok
One of the films I got is the Rollei Paul & Reinhold 640 35mm, looks interesting. Also was contemplating buying a 100' roll of ilford pan 50 as I have a spare bulk loader. Slow film is good for long and or multiple exposures.....there is just too much variety to be stuck on one film.

 

[rick shaw]

...So how did you choose your film?...

You don't pick the film, the film picks you.
It's a Zen thing.

 

[VinceInMT]

I've enjoyed reading the range of ideas on this topic. For me, as a more or less serious hobbyist for 48 years, I've used what was available or struck my fancy. In my beginning years it was Kodak materials because they were readily available. When the army sent me to Germany I started using Agfa products, especially their papers. Today it's mostly Ilford.

While I understand the importance of knowing one's film/developer/printing materials to get the desired result, I am also in favor of serendipity. I recently acquired an Epson V500 scanner (given to me for free) and have started scanning everything I've shot since 1973. I've even surprised myself with the range of films I used over the years. Heck, I just scanned a roll of medium format Ektachrome I shot in 1975 that I'd developed in Neofin's C-22 developer. Talk about some weird looking images.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

I recently acquired an Epson V500 scanner (given to me for free) and have started scanning everything I've shot since 1973.

I supppsed if I scanned everything I’ve ever shot I’d have a better idea, but I don’t have the patience to figure out an efficient scanning routine. It takes entirely too long.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I look in my freezer and decide which film is best to my plans.

 

[awty]

I look in my freezer and decide which film is best to my plans.

Just like any good craftsperson you must have wide knowledge of your materials and where and how to apply them.

 

[rick shaw]

I don't choose the film. I let the film choose me.
It's a Zen thing.

 

[VinceInMT]

I supppsed if I scanned everything I’ve ever shot I’d have a better idea, but I don’t have the patience to figure out an efficient scanning routine. It takes entirely too long.

I do it while I am working on other things, like after I drop a print in the fixer, I go next door and load the next strip of film, then back to the darkroom. I have a Lenovo laptop connected to the scanner that's dedicated to the task and it and the scanner are pretty patient about waiting for me to change to the next couple frames. I started a month ago and have 5,300 scanned so far. Of course, I'm retired and it's been too cold here to do much else. Heck, it was -22F last Sunday morning.

 

[cliveh]

How did you choose your film?

The original post poses a very valid question and the reason I chose FP4, 125 ISO, is that I wanted a film that would provide sufficiently fine grain and allow me to use mostly f5.6/f8/f11 at 1/125 in average light conditions within European countries. Making thousands of exposures using the same developer and dilution allows consistency of practice. I don’t want to think about film and process, as I’m more interested in what I see in the viewfinder.