ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology : SFX Film / ULF Film / New Prods

[Petzi]

Controlling depth of field is not a valid reason for demanding slow speed film. You can achieve the same with a grey filter using regular film.

 

[Harrigan]

I would buy delta 25 up to 8x10 format because I enjoy long exposures and efke 25 is absent of all but a little red sensitivity. I'm assuming d-25 would be more red sensitive than e-25 and if not I would not use it.

 

[dpurdy]

fine grain yes

I will throw in one more vote for the Delta 25 in 120 and I would definitely buy it.

As to cool tone papers I totally don't get the attraction to it. Cool tone prints leave me cold.

Please don't further brighten the Ilford Warm Tone Fiber. I wish I could find some way to get it to warm up more. It seems to have become more neutral lately.

 

[srs5694]

Controlling depth of field is not a valid reason for demanding slow speed film. You can achieve the same with a grey filter using regular film.

Just because it's possible to achieve an effect in one way doesn't make doing it in another way "not valid." (What's more, I wasn't "demanding" slow films in my post -- I was just pointing out one possible use for them.) Controlling depth-of-field via slow films is a perfectly valid approach. Yes, you can generally use an ND filter to cut the light getting to the film. This isn't always a practical approach, though. For instance, I've got a couple of ultrawide lenses (a Mir-47K 20mm and a Zenitar 16mm) which take bizarre rear-mount filters. To use an ND filter with either lens, it would probably have to be custom-built (if you know anybody selling ND filters for these lenses, please provide a reference). What's more, using the filter would be awkward at best, particularly if the filter were very dense, since you'd need to frame the shot without the filter, then unmount the lens, add the filter, and remount the lens before shooting. Repeating this dance for every shot might not be necessary with less dense filters, but even they could cause the viewfinder focus aids to black out. The Mir-47K's rear-mounted filters interfere with the mirror on some of my cameras, taking filters completely out of the running for certain situations. Even conventional front-mounted filters can be a hassle to use and can cause vignetting (particularly if you wanted to use another filter in addition to the ND filter).

So in sum, ND filters can do the job -- but they aren't necessarily the best solution in all situations or for all photographers. Having a film that can achieve this goal expands one's options. Using such a film to achieve these goals is a perfectly valid approach.

 

[Petzi]

We are not talking about a very dense filter here, we are talking about a filter that takes out 1 or 2 f-stops. What you want is 25 ASA film. Seriously, if you use ASA 50 or ASA 100 b/w film, and you use a regular b/w filter like yellow (or orange, or red...), is it not slow enough for you in any practical situation? Can you not use a shorter exposure if you want to reduce depth of field? Are you going to load a new film in your camera whenever you need small depth of field?

 

[Markok765]

Ah, Marko - you have SO much to see... I am a guy who likes grain quite a bit - there is so much to do with a film like this!
Shoot some more, develop some more and most of all - print some nice big shots. There is more to it than just grain. Again, its a case of the right tool for the job - and until you see the look you can get from a nice, slow film with super fine grain and great tonality, you won't know what I mean.
And this is coming from a guy who frequently throws TriX and HP5+ into Rodinal - even in 35mm. I guatantee you that you will be on this very forum screaming the praises of this film should it ever happen and should you get your hands on some. Trust me, its a good thing.

Peter.

Tmax-100 in rodinal stand has just a hint of grain in 35mm which is what i shoot. beautiful tonality. so smooth! ill post as soom as i go to my photo class and get the 8x10

 

[Markok765]

- like overly opinionated teenagers, .

Quite rude! I Love grain! today delta 3200 in rodinal 1:200 3 hours! or tommorow, as soon as i get some ss reels

 

[Dave Parker]

Quite rude! I Love grain! today delta 3200 in rodinal 1:200 3 hours! or tommorow, as soon as i get some ss reels

Marko,

I have raised three teenagers to adulthood and I hate to say it, most teenagers ARE quite opinionated!

r.

 

[Markok765]

Marko,

I have raised three teenagers to adulthood and I hate to say it, most teenagers ARE quite opinionated!

r.

Not me!

Marko, The newly subscribed non-opinionated teen.
Except that apug is great!

 

[Dave Parker]

Not me!

Marko, The newly subscribed non-opinionated teen.
Except that apug is great!

Well your last 250 plus postings seem to contridict your opinion of yourself Marko..

R.

 

[Markok765]

Well your last 250 plus postings seem to contridict your opinion of yourself Marko..

R.

Possibly...

 

[Dave Parker]

Possibly...

Probable...

R.

 

[Markok765]

Probable...

R.

NOT!

 

[Dave Parker]

NOT!

Marko,

As I said in another thread, use your gift wisely, you have been very opinionated with many people who have far more experiance than you, you can learn here if you want, or you can not, the choice is your, Jeff gave you a gift, don't waste it...

R.

 

[srs5694]

We are not talking about a very dense filter here, we are talking about a filter that takes out 1 or 2 f-stops.[ What you want is 25 ASA film. Seriously, if you use ASA 50 or ASA 100 b/w film, and you use a regular b/w filter like yellow (or orange, or red...), is it not slow enough for you in any practical situation?

First, color filters change the tonal quality of a film. Second, my comments about filters being impractical with certain lenses or in certain situations still apply, whether they're ND filters or color filters.

Can you not use a shorter exposure if you want to reduce depth of field?

Not always. Suppose you're shooting ISO 125 film in bright daylight. The Sunny 16 rule says that you'd need f/16 at 1/125s exposure. If the camera's fastest shutter speed is, say, 1/1000s, that gives you just four stops in which to "maneuver," and a choice of f/16, f/11, /f8, and f/5.6 for apertures. If you want less depth of field than f/5.6 provides, your only option is to use a filter -- which as I said in my earlier post, is not always practical.

Are you going to load a new film in your camera whenever you need small depth of field?

Not on a frame-by-frame basis, no; but I've got several cameras, and so if I plan to shoot something that I expect will require narrow depth of field, I'll load a camera with an appropriate film.

I'm not saying that using a slow film is the only way to control depth of field or even that it's usually the best way; however, it is a tool in a photographer's toolbox. If you choose not to use that tool, then that is, of course, your right. We all have different equipment, different subjects, different methods of going about our photography, different budgets, different personal preferences, and so on. These differences lead us to choose different tools to accomplish a goal -- or different goals, for that matter. If you think a method isn't the best, then fine; please say so. Dismissing a method as "not valid" is ridiculous and borders on being offensive, though.

 

[Brac]

If people want a new ISO 25 speed film that's fine by me and I wouldn't want to tread on anyone's toes. However living in the UK with its frequent gloomy weather and low light levels, I find there are not that many days of the year where even ISO 100 is adequate. So I can't see myself using such a slow film. No doubt with a tripod it would be fine but I'm not that keen on lugging one of those around, well not at my age! I suspect I would not be alone in this view and that demand over here would be somewhat limited.

 

[Petzi]

I have even switched to ~ ASA 400 for all handheld work. I still use a lot of ~ ASA 100 film though.

 

[Terence]

I will throw in one more vote for the Delta 25 in 120 and I would definitely buy it.

As to cool tone papers I totally don't get the attraction to it. Cool tone prints leave me cold.

Please don't further brighten the Ilford Warm Tone Fiber. I wish I could find some way to get it to warm up more. It seems to have become more neutral lately.

Personally, I tend to use cool-tone paper and wish it was less "warm". Different strokes . . .

 

[dpurdy]

Personally, I tend to use cool-tone paper and wish it was less "warm". Different strokes . . .

I realize there are differences of opinion. There are 15 pages of opinions on this thread. I find however that there are lots of cool tone papers to choose from and I am finding no really nice warm tone papers at all anymore. I don't know how it came to be that cool tones equated to good in silver gel printing but I think it started with Ansel Adams. For those of us who want warmth and long scale prints that don't look like under printed paper the only option I know of is alternative processes. Now days I have to hold my Ilford Warm tone paper up next to the neutral tone paper to be able to see the warmth.

different strokes as you say.

 

[ajuk]

I want HP5 in APS

 

[Markok765]

I want HP5 in APS

If only they made reels for that..

 

[ajuk]

If only they made reels for that..

Jobo Item #2519

Seriously though XP2 in APS might be an idea since Kodak D/C there B&W APS film, I know a lot of kids have got hold of those old APS SLRs.

 

[unregistered]

I will throw in one more vote for the Delta 25 in 120 and I would definitely buy it.

As to cool tone papers I totally don't get the attraction to it. Cool tone prints leave me cold.

Please don't further brighten the Ilford Warm Tone Fiber. I wish I could find some way to get it to warm up more. It seems to have become more neutral lately.

Use another paper. Forte comes to mind, and is warmer that Ilford.

 

[B&Wenthusiast]

Ilford Photo info

Still very new at this art, but we really need the 3200 (35mm) for shooting dancers who perform on dark stages. I don't know the settings we use (I only work in the darkroom part; the shooter is in Ireland visiting for a month). Please keep bringing it on...love those Ilford products!

 

[reellis67]

Personally, I tend to use cool-tone paper and wish it was less "warm". Different strokes . . .

Agreed. %90 of my prints are either neutral or cool toned - much of my subject matter just doesn't fit with the warmtone look to my eye. On the other hand, my wife (a painter) looks at most of my prints and says some of them would look better warm toned...

- Randy