If there could only be three black and white films...

[alanrockwood]

OK, I realize that there have been some discussions along these lines already, but it's the nature of people to engage in discourse, even on topics that have been discussed before, so here goes:

If there could only be three black and white films available to us, what should they be? I'll take a crack at answering the question, not so much based on my experience but more on comments in various discussions over the years. I am not asking which emulsions do I think will be the survivors in the market place, but more along the lines of which three films would provide the breadth of capabilities along with high quality of the products.

1) A traditional medium speed emulsion... fp4+
2) A modern medium speed emulsion... T-max 100
3) A fast emulsion, either traditional or modern technology... T-max 400

What do you think?

My guess is that the biggest disagreements will be on the fast emulsion. By the way, I am thinking more along the lines of 35mm film. Also, you don't have to stick to the three categories I defined, but I think these categories may be a good way to frame people's thoughts.

 

[rrusso]

I'd like to see HP5+ and Delta 100 survive. Since I'm an Ilford guy, let's include Delta 3200 as well.

 

[BrianShaw]

1

I don’t need 3.

 

[alanrockwood]

1

I don’t need 3.

Which one?

 

[BrianShaw]

Which one?

#1, FP-4+

... or Plus-X or Verichrome-Pan if Kodak would honor such a request.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

HP5 in sheet film
FP4 in sheet film
HIE in sheet film

 

[Hatchetman]

I gotta have Tri-x that's all I care about. Nothing better for stage shows.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I love TMY-2 in sheet film and considered it for on of the three...but I can no longer afford it... especially in 8x10!

 

[RattyMouse]

1. Neopan Acros
2. Delta 400
3. Delta 3200

 

[Dali]

1) Tri-X
2) Tri-X
3) Tri-X

 

[removed account4]

1, and not one that you have listed
i would only need an orthochromatic film or in other words something pre 1920s
slow is fine ( when i say slow it can be iso 24 )
it could be available in all sizes from 35mm on up
(NOT including roll film sizes too many issues with bad paper ) and provided by
the photoconglomerate known as KIFSF ( Kodak, Ilford,Foma, Slavich, Fuji )
or whatever they will call themselves ...

 

[Ko.Fe.]

HP5+ is all I need. But dirt cheap Polypan F was handy for tests of cameras, lenses.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Really need only one 400TX! Or alternatively Eastman Double-X , a very nice film.

 

[Two23]

My choice would be Ilford Pan F (in 35mm, 120, and 4x5), Acros 100 (35mm, 120, 4x5), and HP5 (35mm, 120, 4x5.) I do miss Efke 25 when working with Petzval lenses.


Kent in SD

 

[Cholentpot]

Tmax-100, Tmax-400, Tri-x 400 for when I need a push.

 

[MattKing]

T-Max 400
T-Max 100
Plus X if it comes back. If not, FP 4+

 

[keenmaster486]

Pulling out all the stops and forgetting about existing films... (this is actually what I would do if I were to run a film company)

1. Something very cheap but still totally usable. I could see an orthochromatic emulsion on a thin base. Low speed, maybe 50 ISO or even 25. Cheap to make and sell, easy to use, perfect for older/fixed shutter/aperture cameras but still great for anything. Film for the masses, i.e. the Model T of films. Being orthochromatic would make it perfect for education and learning too, as you could develop it under a red safelight. This would be the high volume production film and one that the hipsters would normally buy for the attractive price and graininess.

2. Something like Tri-X. High speed, traditional photojournalism film. It's simple, Tri-X is one of the most beloved films ever made and it deserves its reputation.

3. Something with a denser look and deeper blacks like TMAX, HP5 maybe? More modern film design, low grain, sharp. Maybe 100 ISO.

IMO this would be a killer B&W lineup.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

• Pan F+ 50
• ADOX CMS II 20/25
• Delta 100 or Acros 100

 

[jim10219]

TMAX 100
Rollie IR 400
Tri-X 400

Those are the only ones I ever buy. I could honestly do without the Tri-X if I needed to, but it has an interesting look that I appreciate sometimes. Nothing wrong with the others from Fuji and Ilford... I could be perfectly happy with their equivalents. I just got my start with the Kodak brands and am most familiar with them. But the Rollie IR is non negotiable. Not only is it the only IR film left worth using, it makes a decent 400 speed regular film, making it cheap and versatile.

 

[tomfrh]

I agree with your initial 3. If only one - TMAX400 without a doubt.

 

[RauschenOderKorn]

Adox CMS 20 II
Adox CHS 100
Rollei RPX 400

 

[Svenedin]

According to the OP’s criteria:

1) FP4+
2) Delta 100 (can do without this)
3) HP5+ (or Delta 400 or T-Max 400)

I really only need 2 films, FP4+ and HP5+ but I do like the finer grain of a modern 400 emulsion sometimes.

 

[LeftCoastKid]

1. PanF + (in 120)
2. TMax 100 (in 120)
3. Tri-X/ HP5+ (in 35mm)

 

[NJH]

I agree with your initial 3. If only one - TMAX400 without a doubt.

This but with the Fuji tapes on 120 and confidence that the backing paper issue is fixed.

 

[trendland]

Sure there is no need of more than 3 different emulsions to 95% of all photographers.
Comming to formats in different size it is beginning to be complicate.
In 135 / 120 / sheed films you will often not see the same film.
As soon as possible you will need more than 3 emulsions.
Comming to special intentions from different shootings you will soon need a special bw emulsion - may be only one time a year.
If you have mixed workflow with digital equipment you perhaps need just one bw
emulsion to have bw shootings sometimes on film.
If you avoid mixed workflow like me - I still don't have digital equipment and I realy don't miss it - there is a need of much more different films.
Comming to compare todays situation with the past we all know situations of many different emulsions witch were to try out because of different pricing and
characteristics.

with regards