Justify your choice of film

[Donald Qualls]

Only thing I've seen for import was in hundred kilo or larger quanities on Ali Baba or similar.

 

[laingsoft]

You can talk to suppliers and ask for a sample, most of the time they'll ship you one, I've managed to get various chemicals as one-offs from a few suppliers.

 

[bluechromis]

In 35 mm Silvermax 100 with Silvermax developer is a fav. The mid-tones are smooth and dynamic range and fine grain are great. I shoot quite a lot of Tmax 400. I like the look of Tri-X 400, but I frequently need to crop my images and the T-max gives more options with that especially in 35 mm. I like to do infrared stuff and I'm mostly switched from Rolliei IR 400 to JCH Street pan for that. I like the Fomapan 400 for the auras it gives highlight areas. I'm checking out Adox HR 50. I recently tried some Orwo UN 54 100 and it had a creamy tonality and fine grain that was nice. For color my fav's are Fuji Provia and Velivia because I like the look of slide film.

 

[mshchem]

Justify my film choice? Really? That's like asking do I prefer a 12mm or 15mm wrench. You use what is appropriate and available.

 

[DF]

I'm now on a Kentmere 100 kick after shooting mainly FP4 for several years. It gives me the kind of grey scale I like where I find FP4 abit too contrasty.

 

[mawz]

coming back to film after a hiatus, I'm sticking with what I settled on prior to the hiatus

HP5+ in D-76 for everything fast
PanF+ in Rodinal 1:100 stand for everything slow

I've never much liked the modern T-grain type films except Acros (which was just lovely in Rodinal 1:100) and my other go-to's were APX25, 100 & 400, which aren't available anymore although I understand there are some very similar films now. I'm always open to experimenting though.

 

[Down Under]

HP5 in 120 for flexibility and as bonus it's some of the best Price/Quality ratio in Europe. TriX became quite expensive, as $3 a roll more! Sometimes a bit flat, but a good use of filters and split grade in printing brings a bit of life.

For ISO 100, Delta 100 for both 35mm and 120. If maximizing quality, better do so with the latest tech and that is the Tgrain type films. It is also quite a nice film itself. I'd need to test more as it's a tad contrasty on some scenes (ie. HC110 might not be box speed).

Cheaper films I use: Kentmere and Agfaphoto (new) APX, supposedly the same Harman manufactured product under the same guise (rumors are Ultrafine might too). Cheap and good. I think there was a thread recently here praising APX100. No fault, great for point and shoots.

Fomapan 100 + 200. In Europe it's the cheapest 120 film. Good quality and quite a pleasant look and tonality.

Living as I do in Australia, land of everything expensive, the thought of Tri-X at $3 a roll made me want to cry. The artificially low value of our South Pacific Peso aka the Ozzydolla helps big biz make bigger profits but makes buying imported products like film, printing paper and darkroom chemistry quite an investment.

Ilford HP5+ and FP4+ are fine films, but Down Under they cost >$50 for five rolls. Expired film on offer at $35-$45 and people seem to buy it. I've not seen Delta 100 or 400 for sale for a long time. XP2 also has had its day as a general use film, it may be too high-contrasty for our harsh Oz sunlight. Some photographers I know make amazing images with it by processing as a black-and-white film. I have a stock of it in 120 and 35mm in my film freezer. I should really do something with it.

Kentmere not often available in 120 in Australia. Agfaphoto film gets packaged as other-brand products. Fomapan I've mostly avoided in the past as I disliked the iffy quality control and at times poor contrast, but their newer versions may be improved. I should try it again.

I hear positive reports about some of the made in China films currently produced, but with the tendency of our glorious leaders here to lick American bottoms and attack and criticise Beijing (all the while fully expecting the Chinese to just smile politely and go on buying our exports) we may not be seeing any of that in the shops for a while.

My comments for comparison. Some of you may be interested to know how we Antipodeans get by down here on our big Lucky Country island in the far southern seas. If anyone cares to know, today is 19C and sunny in country Victoria, so far the early spring weather is wonderful. A glass of good Tasmanian red wine with my lunch will make the day even better.

 

[fs999]

Kentmere not often available in 120 in Australia.

Doesn't exist in 120...

 

[Bikerider]

Kentmere has never been available in 120 size which may well have something to do with it 'not being available in Australia. There is nothing wrong with Kentmere film, even the 400 iso 35mm when developed in ID11 will give me a 12x16 which from a normal viewing distance the grain is practically invisible.

 

[Pentode]

I switch films often and currently have around 25 varieties of B&W, both 35mm and 120, in my fridge.

My reasons for not being consistent vary:
1) I like to experiment; I'm not a professional photographer and I don't need to make deadlines (or any income) with my photography so I can afford to play with different film and developer combinations and I have fun doing that.
2) I can't pass up a bargain; Expired bulk rolls? Short ends of some weird copy film? A brick of film somebody is clearing out of their freezer? I'll take it! I've shot thousands of trouble-free frames with expired film and it saves me a lot of money, allowing me to shoot more. (I will NOT, however, pay the absurd higher-than-new prices some people are charging for expired film. That's crazy.)
3) Different purposes; like just about anyone, I'll use a film that's appropriate for the task. I'm not likely to use 1600 at the beach or 50 in low available light.

Among the huge variety I still have favorites which I guess I can 'justify':
Kodak (old) Tri-X, Double-X and Plus-X - The tonality of these films, especially in the mid tones, is just wonderful. I know Plus-X is gone and Tri-X has been reformulated... again, but Plus-X is what I learned on and that's been ingrained in my consciousness as what B&W is supposed to look like. I've learned to like other looks over time but Plus-X and old Tri-X still feels like home to me. Now I find I'm getting a similar thing from Double-X (Eastman 5222). I have a stockpile of Plus-X that will eventually be gone forever and I've learned to like the new version of Tri-X. Thankfully, Double-X behaves, more or less, like it always has. I usually develop these in D-76 1:1.

Orwo UN54+ and N74+ - These two films approximate the tonality of old Plus-X and Tri-X and the price for bulk is very attractive. The grain isn't the same as the Kodak films they mimic, but the overall tonality is right in the ballpark. These get D-76 1:1 or HC-110 dil E, D or H

Rollei Retro 80s - Absolutely the opposite of the Kodak tonality I was just raving about. This film (really Agfa Aviphot Pan 80s and really much slower than ISO 80) has incredibly fine grain and has much less going on in the mid tones than Kodak. I associate it with a more modern look and I really like it when I want great detail. I develop it in Rodinal 1+50.

Foma 100 - I like this film. It's cheap and it has a look that, to me, is somewhere between the squashed mids of Retro 80s and the older look of Plus-X. I haven't used it in a while (I've been shooting Orwo UN54+ instead) but I was very pleased with it in both Rodinal and D-76 1:1. In Rodinal it reminds me of old Agfa stocks, which I suspect is what it was based on. It's an excellent all-purpose medium speed film.

Kodak HIE High Speed Infrared - I have a stockpile of this stuff that I'm parsing out slowly. When it's gone, it's gone. I absolutely love this film and no IR film before or since has come even close to the same look but I doubt we'll ever see anything like this made again. I'm going to have to come to terms with the Rollei IR stock soon.

Ilford FP4+ and HP5+ - I didn't like these films as much as their Kodak counterparts back when I was getting started 25 years ago but I've come to appreciate them now. I see them as being much more even across the board - they have less punch in the mids - and they're really nice for portraits. Now, if only I were a better portrait photographer....

There are plenty of other films I enjoy using but these are the go-to films that I reach for again and again. I realize that's 10 films, but what can I say? I've got a short attention span, I guess.

 

[BradS]

I too grew up with Kodak and used nothing but Kodak films and chemistry for decades. Early on, I used Verichome pan in 620 and 126 formats - because that's what my mom used and it fit the cameras available to me. In 1976, I took a photo class and bought my first 35mm SLR. In the photo class we used Tri-X in D-76 and Kodak RC papers in Dektol exclusively. I continued with that combination almost exclusively for several decades. I tried Plus-X, and the Tmax films along the way but kept coming back to Tri-X. It looked great and did everything I ever needed/wanted. It is a very flexible and forgiving combination.

When, a few years ago, it looked like Kodak might not survive (and then prices skyrocketed!), I frantically tried all kinds of films and even a few different developers...it was a totally crazy and most unproductive few years. I finally settled on Ilford FP4+. Like Tri-X, it is a fantastic all around emulsion. It is very forgiving of exposure variation. It can be punchy or not, it can do anything and go anywhere I want / need. It works and looks a lot like Tri-X for me. It just works and I don't have to think about the details any more. I can just take pictures and enjoy the moment.

For color, I have been using Fuji Superia X-tra 400 for the past twenty years or so - because, like Tri-X and FP4+, it is a fantastic, all around emulsion (and it used to be very inexpensive). It is forgiving of all manner of excursions from optimal exposure and it is still available at Walmart (although it is no longer inexpensive). Before switching to Fujicolor, I used Kodacolor in all its variations. I love(d) Portra 160 but the stratospheric price prevents me from using it - even for paid work (same with TMY). Someday, I may try Kodak Color Plus 100 - it looks nice.

 

[pentaxuser]

I shoot Fomapan 100 and 400 for everything (as rebranded by Freestyle, .EDU Ultra), because it's one of, if not the least costly film on the market, and it does everything I want from B&W.
BTW, I shoot .EDU Ultra in 4x5, too, for the same reasons as above. Why spend twice as much when the rebranded Foma does the job?

Donald what if anything is written on the edge of this Freestyle film Is it the word Ultra only?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Donald Qualls]

Donald what if anything is written on the edge of this Freestyle film Is it the word Ultra only?

I'm not at home to check my negatives, but the 35mm bulk rolls of Ultra (100 and 400) have no edge marking at all; the 120, as I recall, has frame numbers (the usual 645 spacing, so 1 to 16) and Ultra 400 or Ultra 100.

 

[Craig75]

I just use ilfords line. Theyve got everything covered from slow to ultrafast, from 35mm to ulf, papers, chemicals, fair prices, and are introducing new products.

Cant be bothered arsing around comparing film stocks and developers - ilfords line works. Everyone will make quality films and papers but ilford have got a large lineup, seem organised, and its the factory i want to give my money to.

 

[Old_Dick]

Not that they are available any more. 2475 recording film at 6400 in Acufine with a Nikon 1:2 lens. Loved the grain and could shoot in a coal mine. Panatomic-x and Plus-x in microdol-x 1:3 for the opposite. Gives you an idea how old I am.