Is slow speed, fine grain film dead?

[Ryuji]

If Freestyle sold Acros 100 with an additional neutral density overcoat as Arista Super 32 or something, it would get super rave reviews on this site

 

[avandesande]

If Freestyle sold Acros 100 in regular sheets and in 8x10 they would certainly sell a lot more of it.

If Freestyle sold Acros 100 with an additional neutral density overcoat as Arista Super 32 or something, it would get super rave reviews on this site

 

[Markok765]

Get some pan f plus and rodinall

 

[Dan Fromm]

Another film I miss is slow Kodachromes. 10,II,25.

I guess it is easy to see that what I like does not lead to good sales.

Hmm. I missed this post when the thread was young, but now that its been revived am responding.

I still have a heap of KM in the freezer, use it for closeup shots of fish in aquaria and flowers and such out-of-doors. Nearly all of the shots are illuminated with flash and I try to use enough flash to completely overpower ambient.

I dread the day when I run out. With KM I can shoot at relatively large apertures -- as large as effective f/11 -- and 1/250, my FM2n/N8008S's highest sync speed, when I want good image quality and can live with minimal depth of field and still get no exposure from ambient. With ISO 100 film, e.g., E100G, I'm going to have to stop down farther than I want or use a couple or three stops of ND on the lens to keep full control of aperture. Both solutions are very bad.

When I shoot 2x3 closeup I can shoot at 1/400 so the problem isn't quite as bad, but it is still there. Aargh!

People who don't use flash don't appreciate what slow film is good for. Fast film forces stupid choices.

Shared regrets, Claire,

Dan

 

[BradS]

It is manufactured by the same people who bring you skyhooks, wallstreachers and 1x loops.

and let's not forget the piston return springs, muffler bearings and turn signal fluid.

 

[willie_901]

x-ray check problem can be solved

I

Higher speed films are more sensitive to the X-ray units used in airports and other terminals. With more X-ray checks and higher energy devices, this also increases problems faced by film manufacturers.

PE

Robust all plastic film canisters could be designed and manufactured. This would solve the X-ray check problem for hand-carried luggage.

All you have to do is fill your pockets with the 100 % plastic canisters and walk through.

You can reload existing high ISO film into resusable plastic canisters yourself. Unfortunately existing plastic canisters are not as robust at the metal canisters. But at least you can avoid X-Ray exposure.

 

[gnashings]

As someone who either by need or by want uses the miniature format a lot (35mm), I have to say that I would dearly like to see more choice in the slower roll film - even though, yes, most of my 35mm shooting is pretty much a catalogue of what NOT to do in order to get a sharp image (ie. hand holding, "pushing the nevelope" on shutter speeds, generally no mirror locking going on, etc.). The reason I says this is that grain vs ability to reproduce resolution, optics vs ability of the film, and so on are not the be all and end all of why I shoot, and are by far not the determinant factors in how I judge the final appearance - and the fact is, perhaps Delta 100 is every bit as fine grained as PanF, I know Acros sure looks like it is, but they look different. And when moving up in format size, the issue of grain and resolving ability diminishes even further and brings the unique tonality and appearance of various films to the forefront. I recently saw prints (8x10) made from 35mm Techpan negs, side by side with prints of the same size made from delta 100 6x7 - the grain was comparably miniscule, yet the appearance of the two images was markedly different. I know that this is confusing the issue somewhat (bringing two formats into play), but it clearly illustrated the fact that ultimate resolution and small grain is not the Holy Grail of artistic photography. Perhaps in aerial recon photos or some other type of purely information capturing uses it is, but not to a maker of images that have purpose other than that of pure record.

Has the Delta 25 rumour died a natural death?

Peter.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

In a recent product availability thread, Simon from Ilford said that they are actually working on Delta 25. It's not in production mode, but they are spending effort figuring it out, so that's a good thing. Go Ilford!

 

[Monito]

Any sign of Delta 25? What currently are the finest grain 35mm and 120 films, particularly for portraiture?

 

[Athiril]

Way to bump an old thread...

Portraiture? Portra 400. I'm not joking btw.

For B&W I'd have to go with Rollei ATP.

For 35mm sizes.. I got some 5201 50D and also some Vision Color Print film (exceeds 200 lp/mm @ 1.6:1, should really make a good lens shine)

 

[hpulley]

Finest grain meant for portraiture available in 135 and 120: Portra 160 or Ektar 100 for color; T-Max 100, Delta 100, FP4+ for B&W depending on exactly what your looking for.

 

[BetterSense]

I just printed a 1/2 frame 35mm negative from my Pen F, shot on Arista Premium developed in HC110. Printed at 5x7, the grain is utterly invisible. TMY has even finer grain at the same speed. Why should I shoot 100 speed film, with grain like that? Even more so, why would I want 25 speed film, when the grain from modern 100 speed films is already practically invisible? I rarely wish my film wa slower. I can always stack ND filters.

 

[Athiril]

Different film, different usage.

And from my short testing, Portra 400 appears to have finer grain than 160, though I would have to inspect more closely to see what's going on.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

Overall T-Max 400 is not bad as far as grain.

Jeff

 

[2F/2F]

Well in all of the excitement I lost count, do you feel luck, well do you punk?

Has the larger sizes pushed the smaller slow speed films off the table?

After all with a 20x24 who cares about the speed and grain is not a problem. How much does the Digital community pay the film producers to keep a fine grain small format film off the market?

I am assuming that you must be talking only about large format film.

There is Rollei ATP. It is slow, sharp, and fine-grained. If you shoot this film in 4x5, you will rival the contact prints from a 20x24 camera.

If you had enough money, I am sure you could order a run of ATP in various custom sizes. But for the really large format, there is no need for it. It isn't some conspiracy. It's about film companies not wanting to go broke by making products that a handful of people will buy.

And in regards to the comment about not caring about the speed when using a large format camera, I disagree. Using faster film helps you freeze action better, helps you use smaller apertures, and can prevent you from having to enter the land of reciprocity failure.

 

[benjiboy]

Different film, different usage.

And from my short testing, Portra 400 appears to have finer grain than 160, though I would have to inspect more closely to see what's going on.

Are we talking about the old Portra 160 NC/VC or the new Portra 160 ?

 

[hpulley]

Different film, different usage.

And from my short testing, Portra 400 appears to have finer grain than 160, though I would have to inspect more closely to see what's going on.

What sort of testing??? Under the grain magnifier while making RA-4 prints, 160 has less grain than 400. Not a lot less mind you but less. Ektar has even less than Portra 160. Printing 6x7 120 Portra 400 to 8x10" you can't really see the grain of Portra 400 so I agree that it isn't really a factor unless you print really big but under the scope you can see a difference.

 

[jacarape]

Like Dan F, I want what now would be called an ultra slow speed film. My camera has a max 1/1000 shutter speed and my lenses (as 35 and a 75) both have max apertures of 1.4. I like them wide open.

Si I need and want an ultra slow speed color film, an E6 would be sweet.

But as only two of us on the thread have mentioned this, it's an issue that will never drive a product.

The speed/grain push reminds me of digital megapixel wars. It's impoirtant to the mass market and drives sales and I'm ok with that.

I don't have a problem with shooting night street with a RF camera and a fast 35/1.4 at ISO 100.

 

[MrBaz]

Like Dan F, I want what now would be called an ultra slow speed film. My camera has a max 1/1000 shutter speed and my lenses (as 35 and a 75) both have max apertures of 1.4. I like them wide open.

Si I need and want an ultra slow speed color film, an E6 would be sweet.

But as only two of us on the thread have mentioned this, it's an issue that will never drive a product.

The speed/grain push reminds me of digital megapixel wars. It's impoirtant to the mass market and drives sales and I'm ok with that.

I don't have a problem with shooting night street with a RF camera and a fast 35/1.4 at ISO 100.

Velvia 50?
You might be able to find some old Ektar 25 on ebay.

 

[L Gebhardt]

Like Dan F, I want what now would be called an ultra slow speed film. My camera has a max 1/1000 shutter speed and my lenses (as 35 and a 75) both have max apertures of 1.4. I like them wide open.

Same for shooting water. But there will never be film slow enough for wide open and long shutter speeds. For that a ND filter works just fine, and would to keep you times within the range supported by your camera.

 

[Athiril]

Best thing about ATP is the spectral sensitivity and high contrast of the film.. run throw a low contrast development

Anyway, I'll look at the negs directly new Portra 160, new Portra 400.

Interesting to note, that new Portra 160 and 400 both have the same replenishment rate.

 

[hpulley]

I develop non-replenished, 2 rolls of 160 this morning, will do 2 400 tonight. If I could load 2 120 rolls per reel I'd have done all 4 this morning...

 

[Curt]

I think I was referring to medium format. In all this excitement I've lost count. 06 might as well be 1906.

 

[hpulley]

I think I was referring to medium format. In all this excitement I've lost count. 06 might as well be 1906.

Great fun that you've found your old thread, Curt. You're right in many ways for film, 2006 might as well be 1906...

I'm surprised Monito didn't ask in the original Delta 25 thread:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[Monito]

I'm surprised Monito didn't ask in the original Delta 25 thread:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Because I didn't know it might even exist. But thanks for the link; it directed me to the real Delta 25 thread: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)