If you could shoot only one Black & White film, what would it be?

[Juan Valdenebro]

Wow!
This shows how differently all of us think... Or how different our types of photographs are...
I don't think a single film can do everything I do.
Anyway, my answer is HP5+, because it can do most things, and also because it's the film I know best.
But from a more neutral point of view, I'd say the best films for handholding are TMY-2, Tri-X and HP5+, and the best ones for tripod work are FP4+ and TMY-2: TMX is great for that too, but too slow sometimes, and with a nearly digital look: very limited.
It seems the most serious answer, then, would be TMY-2: great for both things. It also has the most beautiful tendency to sharp, tight, equalized visible grain I know of.
Tri-X is a marvel sometimes, but not really versatile, and its present grain isn't for every subject, especially in 35mm.
This question is a tough one...
I'll stay with HP5+, because it's the best I can buy here.
If one day I could buy here TMY-2 only, I wouldn't suffer at all, but HP5+ is better for pushing: not what I prefer to do, but flash is worse.

 

[Pieter12]

HP5+ in 120. I shoot it at ISO 160, but it can be pushed to 800 if need be. And it usually is available and a reasonable price.

 

[gone]

There are quite a few films that I could use as my only film. Delta 100, Tri-X (probably the favorite here), Foma 400/100, etc.

I think we tend to stress too much importance on things like tonality, grain, etc. In the end, it's just really about the image. Better to have an underdeveloped photo made w/ cheap film of (showing my age here) Sophia Loren, than a perfect shot of The Wicked Witch of the West.

 

[Melvin J Bramley]

Ilford HP5 developed in DDX at box speed or at ei 200 in Perceptol 2:1.
That or FP4 or the occasional Delta100.
A lot to be said for availability ; when your out of film its no time to experiment with another stock.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Wow!
This shows how differently all of us think... Or how different our types of photographs are...
I don't think a single film can do everything I do.
Anyway, my answer is HP5+, because it can do most things, and also because it's the film I know best.
But from a more neutral point of view, I'd say the best films for handholding are TMY-2, Tri-X and HP5+, and the best ones for tripod work are FP4+ and TMY-2: TMX is great for that too, but too slow sometimes, and with a nearly digital look: very limited.
It seems the most serious answer, then, would be TMY-2: great for both things. It also has the most beautiful tendency to sharp, tight, equalized visible grain I know of.
Tri-X is a marvel sometimes, but not really versatile, and its present grain isn't for every subject, especially in 35mm.
This question is a tough one...
I'll stay with HP5+, because it's the best I can buy here.
If one day I could buy here TMY-2 only, I wouldn't suffer at all, but HP5+ is better for pushing: not what I prefer to do, but flash is worse.

The only Ilford films I've spent much time with are the XP series. But, I've come to realize that if I want the benefits of XP-X, I can do so with a good color negative film and then.....I know this is verbotten....remove all the color in my computer.

The second generation TMY-2 is an astoundingly versatile film. Grain like a classic ISO 100 film or even slower, but with that ISO 400 speed. Too bad it's so expensive, even in bulk. $150/100' roll, presently. But then, quality costs.

 

[braxus]

If discontinued films, its a toss up between Efke 25 and Panatomic X. But if I was to choose a currently made film today, it would be Ilford Pan F+, especially in 120.

 

[Keith Tapscott.]

Perhaps a new thread of discontinued films we would like to have back would be of interest?

 

[pkupcik]

My favorites right now are Acros 100, HP5+, Delta 3200. If I had to pick my favorite it would be Delta 3200, just love the look in low light conditions, don't care for it in bright light. If I could shoot only one, it would probably be HP5+, it's ISO 400 so fairly versatile, grain is pleasing (find TMAX400 too sharp and contrasty), and it's not too contrasty, making it easier for me with development and scanning and post processing in photoshop.

 

[baachitraka]

- Fomapan 200 for everyday

- Fomapan 400 for the enhanced grain.

Both developed in Foma Excel.

 

[Don_ih]

What about Aviphot 200, since that's what all black and white film will eventually be, anyway?

 

[NB23]

TMZ forever.

 

[gone]

I wonder if Tri-X wins out here? For B&W photographers, that's been their our go-to film for a long time. I like a lot of other films, but Tri-X is so flexible, it's just amazing how many ways you can shoot it and get very different images.

 

[removedacct3]

- Fomapan 200 for everyday

Fomapan 200 would have been my choice as well if it wasn't for the many defects that plague 120 film. Such a shame ....

 

[George Mann]

Perhaps a new thread of discontinued films we would like to have back would be of interest?

Kodachrome and Pan X here.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Perhaps a new thread of discontinued films we would like to have back would be of interest?

Yeah, Verichrome Pan and Royal X Pan would be my choices. VP went just as I was starting to understand different B&W film characteristics, but it was so forgiving even a rank amateur could produce good negatives with it. And nothing else has ever equaled Royal X -- high speed, unashamed grain, and it came in sizes from 35 mm up to at least 4x5 (it was popular with press photographers in the last days of the Speed Graphic being their primary tool). Like P3200 only with Even More Grain.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Yeah, love that B&W Kodachrome! /s

Kodachrome and Pan X here.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Yeah, Verichrome Pan and Royal X Pan would be my choices. VP went just as I was starting to understand different B&W film characteristics, but it was so forgiving even a rank amateur could produce good negatives with it. And nothing else has ever equaled Royal X -- high speed, unashamed grain, and it came in sizes from 35 mm up to at least 4x5 (it was popular with press photographers in the last days of the Speed Graphic being their primary tool). Like P3200 only with Even More Grain.

Verichrome Pan was an excellent film. Being the "amateur" version of Plus-X, it never got the respect it deserved. I loved it.

 

[Jojje]

Agfa APX 100

 

[Melvin J Bramley]

I have some dry glass plates of unknown manufacture exposed by my Grandfather about 1917 or so.
They still print wonderfully ; my only concern is how to protect them an, indeed, who to gift them to as there is little interest in my family in photos not on a phone..

 

[Keith Tapscott.]

Yeah, Verichrome Pan and Royal X Pan would be my choices. VP went just as I was starting to understand different B&W film characteristics, but it was so forgiving even a rank amateur could produce good negatives with it.

Yes it was a very popular film even in the UK. I believe the Ilford equivalent was called Selochrome Pan.

I miss Fuji Neopan 1600 for pictorial aesthetic reasons although I always exposed it nearer to 400.

 

[GregY]

I have some dry glass plates of unknown manufacture exposed by my Grandfather about 1917 or so.
They still print wonderfully ; my only concern is how to protect them an, indeed, who to gift them to as there is little interest in my family in photos not on a phone..

Melvin, your request will be buried in this thread. You'll more likely get answers if you start a thread asking for glass plate information

 

[FotoD]

- Fomapan 200 for everyday

- Fomapan 400 for the enhanced grain.

Both developed in Foma Excel

Would have been my choice as well. I'd use Adox XT-3 instead though. Sorry to hear about the Photrioers having problems with defects. That's not my experience at all.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Would have been my choice as well. I'd use Adox XT-3 instead though. Sorry to hear about the Photrioers having problems with defects. That's not my experience at all.

I've only had problems with Fomapan 200 in 120. My bulk roll of Fomapan 200 in 35mm is perfect.

 

[koraks]

I've only had problems with Fomapan 200 in 120. My bulk roll of Fomapan 200 in 35mm is perfect.

The notorious Fomapan 200 problems are exclusive to the 120 format. 35mm and sheet formats are just fine. I use it in 4x5 a lot. I've given up on it in 120 since the problems apparently are beyond Foma's capability or willingness to solve.

 

[Steve York]

Nice to still have a wide selection of B&W films. Variety if good. I've shot a boatload of bulk rolled Foma 100 over the last many years. I like the imperfect, classic look, and the fact that it's "inexpensive" is just icing on the cake. Who doesn't Try-X, right? So expensive though. Lot of good films out there.