Indoor volleyball game: which film?

[tbm]

Next weekend I will be shooting an indoor volleyball game with my Leica R8 and probably my 180mm APO Elmarit. Since these days I'm only shooting b&w film, which do you recommend? I suspect the lighting will be rather low and dull which means ISO 100, my favorite speed, will be out of the question. At the same time, I loathe gritty grain in prints and want a good tone spread.

 

[Paul Howell]

I would shoot TriX and develop in Dinafine, if you can get it, I have not much luck in getting it in the last few years.

 

[Ornello]

Next weekend I will be shooting an indoor volleyball game with my Leica R8 and probably my 180mm APO Elmarit. Since these days I'm only shooting b&w film, which do you recommend? I suspect the lighting will be rather low and dull which means ISO 100, my favorite speed, will be out of the question. At the same time, I loathe gritty grain in prints and want a good tone spread.

The best of the very fast films in my experience is Fuji Neopan 1600. Its true speed is sbout 650-800, attainable in Xtol or Acutol. Run tests first, because this film develops very quickly. Unlike the other two very fast films (which are rather soft in contrast), it tends toward harsh contrast unless development is controlled by greater-than-normal dilution. I use Acutol 1+16.5 for about 7,5-8 minutes. It is much finer-grained than Delta 3200, and considerably finer-grained than T-Max 3200.

 

[SchwinnParamount]

I would shoot TriX and develop in Dinafine, if you can get it, I have not much luck in getting it in the last few years.

I second Paul's choice but I would suggest XTOL which is easy to find. XTOL also has the advantage of preserving the rated film speed of TriX and gives fine grain when not diluted or at the most diluted 1:1

 

[Ornello]

I second Paul's choice but I would suggest XTOL which is easy to find. XTOL also has the advantage of preserving the rated film speed of TriX and gives fine grain when not diluted or at the most diluted 1:1

The Neopan 1600 will give you about 2/3 to one full a stop more true speed than Tri-X in anything.

 

[KevinR]

Not that I'm an expert, but I just shot some Tri-X along side some TMax 400 developed in Ilfosol-S, and I am quite impressed with the tight grain in the Tri-X. I hadn't shot it in about 10 years, and am now wondering why that is.

 

[jd callow]

Do a search on APUG. Many have had very good luck shooting tri-x @ ~ 1600. Helen B and David Goldfarb both have much to say on the subject.

 

[Ornello]

Not that I'm an expert, but I just shot some Tri-X along side some TMax 400 developed in Ilfosol-S, and I am quite impressed with the tight grain in the Tri-X. I hadn't shot it in about 10 years, and am now wondering why that is.

Can you show a comparison?

 

[Bob Carnie]

You may want to try HP5 pushed to 800 processed in Microphen. I have seen excellent results with this combination.

 

[KevinR]

Can you show a comparison?

I don't have a scanner, I actually just developed the film this weekend and printed this morning. I grabbed the Tri-X by accident. I had planned on shooting all Tmax. But to my surprise, the Tri-X looked really good.

 

[Eric Jones]

I would give Tri-X in Diafine a try. Here is an example:

Canon EOS-1 - 85mm F1.2L
Tri-X (TXT) @ 1600 in Diafine
Prints nice with a number 4 filter
1/250 @ F2.8 - Available Lighting Only

 

[tbm]

Thanks very much, Eric! I'll run a roll of Tri-X through Diafine in the next 24 hours and determine what I get and how much I like it.

Terry

 

[mikeb_z5]

I shoot tri-x @ 1600 regularly and develop in XTOL. I am pleased with the results. YMMV

some examples:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

mike

 

[MattCarey]

That's a nice shot-Eric. The expressions in the shooter and blocker make the shot interesting.

My neighbor shot for his high school newspaper. He liked the 4x5 speed graphic because of the high shutter speed. This would have been in the 50's. I can only imagine the monster flashes going off to give him enough light with the older, slower films.

Matt

 

[joeyk49]

I haven't shot black and white inside gym, yet...Do you still need a filter for the flouro or sodium lights? I know that they really beat up color daylight films, if left unfiltered...

 

[John Koehrer]

Hi Joe,
No you shouldn't need filtration for B&W indoors. filters are used to balance color temp with color films.

 

[sterioma]

I have had a good success with Tri-X @1600 developed in Microphen (hard to find I'am afraid, but you'll never know...). 12 minutes with 30 sec initial agitation and 1 inversion every 2 minutes.

Here's an example from the shots I took a a few weeks ago of my newborn daughter. Less grainier than similar shots I did with Delta 3200, although a bit more contrasty.

Good luck

Stefano

 

[joeyk49]

Hi Joe,
No you shouldn't need filtration for B&W indoors. filters are used to balance color temp with color films.

Ah, yes...[slaps forehead] and this would be why I need a tungsten filter inside home, if I'm not using flash...and bw seems relatively uneffected...hmmm...now I REALLY want to play with some TMZ 3200 that I happened to have, waiting in the frig...thanks Shagg!

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Perhaps HP5 if the Tri-X doesn't work out?

For what it's worth... If you like the Tri-X pushed two stops, then by all means stick with it. This late in the game my recommendation may be pointless, but I have really liked using HP5 @ EI 800/1600 developed in Xtol (full strength) for indoor use. So if the Tri-X doesn't work out, this might be for you as well.

- Thom

Next weekend I will be shooting an indoor volleyball game with my Leica R8 and probably my 180mm APO Elmarit. Since these days I'm only shooting b&w film, which do you recommend? I suspect the lighting will be rather low and dull which means ISO 100, my favorite speed, will be out of the question. At the same time, I loathe gritty grain in prints and want a good tone spread.