• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

lack of high speed 35mm b&w films

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
201,819
Messages
2,830,660
Members
100,971
Latest member
Tom Janu
Recent bookmarks
0

Ricardo Miranda

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
2,408
Location
London, UK
Format
35mm
Sorry, but what film did Ilford introduce in 2009? Thanks!
The Kentmere range.
Just do a search in this forum and you'll find the relevant posts including one form Simon about its introduction, first in the American markets, then in the domestic and European markets.
 

Ricardo Miranda

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
2,408
Location
London, UK
Format
35mm
P.S. Here is what Simon wrote: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)
The entire thread is a good read.
 

Svenedin

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Mar 19, 2016
Messages
1,191
Location
Surrey, United Kingdom
Format
Med. Format RF
I have had very good results with 3200 Delta in Ilfotech DD-X. I have even pushed it to 12,500 and though the grain was obvious at that speed it was still pleased with the results. This was 120 roll film though not 35mm. Picture is Ilford Delta 3200 @ 12,500 in DD-X taken on an 1936 Zeiss folder indoors with ambient light (8"x10" print). Ilford recommends DD-X for their tabular grain films. It is expensive but consistent and easy to use.
 

Attachments

  • Photo833.jpg
    Photo833.jpg
    219.9 KB · Views: 133

Poisson Du Jour

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
5,462
Location
.
Format
Digital
High speed films are I think the preserve of arty-abstract type photography where development is considered to either maximise grain or contrast or both. That's certainly what I do pushing Delta 3200 to EI 12,800 (dev=Microphen). This was also standard with the now-gone TMax P3200 film. Both films are beautifully flexible in their final appearance, depending how you rate and expose them. Some viewers think my EI 12,800 images on pinhole were Delta 100.

There is some truth in the statement that films cannot really be pushed or pulled, unless that treatment is specifically recommended. I certainly never do not push or pull the sensitive low-speed transparency films of Fuji, but I commonly push high speed B&W films because that capacity for stretching and contracting them is built in. For many other films, it is a compromise, and often a disastrous one.
 
OP
OP

jojoman2

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 21, 2015
Messages
147
Format
35mm RF
I guess what's really going on for me is that I'm getting picky about grain. I want grain, lots of it. But only if I find the grain structure pleasing. There's another post on APUG about how trying out various film/developer combos nearly ruined that individual's photography. To a certain extent, I absolutely agree with that.
On the other hand, I feel like I'm still developing my own signature through my photos, and part of that is nailing down a routine.

I said before I shoot a lot of tri x. I throw it all through d 76, but I've wanted to try rodinal and xtol (perhaps a little bit of both together). Perhaps I should develop the film at temperatures around or slightly higher than 72 to see what qualities I can coax out of the grain with d76 before I start flipping through combos.

I push tri x in low contrast situations 1 or 2 stops with no problems. I also push 1 stop in the late afternoon when the sun is still out. In NYC there is typically a sunny side of the street and a shadowy side, and all of the cross streets are usually in medium to heavy shade--when I shoot film at box speed I tend to stick to the sunny side, or on the corners where the light hangs around for a while. There are a few great corners in Chelsea and the East Village, a couple near Penn Station. If I know that I want to work in the shadow of the cross streets I'll push my film 1 stop. All of this is fine, I'm getting good enough results.

Still, my current routine is about minimizing grain rather than accentuating it to find a good balance between detail and atmosphere. That's what I'm after... detail and atmosphere.

Anyway... this is just me getting picky about achieving perfect grain, and then getting A LOT of it.
 

bdial

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 2, 2005
Messages
7,516
Location
North East U.S.
Format
Multi Format
If you're using the D-76 straight, diluting it 1 to 1 will give you a little more grain. Rodinal has little or no solvent action, so it will increase the appearance of the grain by a lot, compared to the D-76. A lot of people like that "look", and a huge volume of Tri-X has been processed in Rodinal because of that.
 

StoneNYC

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Aug 5, 2012
Messages
8,345
Location
Antarctica
Format
8x10 Format
HP5+ pushes very well, I know what you mean with the grain in D3200 and I actually prefer the HP5+ pushed to 3200 vs Delta3200 (which is 1000 speed ISO not 1600 like someone said) pushed to 3200.

Examples... All HP5+ in DD-X @3200

In a coffee shop

image.jpeg


In a dimly lit basement with 1 CF light bulb

image.jpeg


In a science classroom

image.jpeg
 

Slixtiesix

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 31, 2006
Messages
1,418
Format
Medium Format
If you want to use Delta 3200 but eschew the grain you could try to expose it at 1200 iso and develop in Perceptol, full strength. I have not tried that myself but It may serve your purpose...

To answer the OP directly, if you view any of the recent market reports you will see that iso400 films outsell all the others by a long margin.

David, where can I find market reports like the one you mentioned?

All we need is some billionaire to suddenly become interested in film photography...

Oh yes! I can already hear him shouting "I will make film photography GREAT AGAIN!"
 

Gerald C Koch

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
8,131
Location
Southern USA
Format
Multi Format
"According to PMA Market Research, roll film sales have plunged from a high of 948 million rolls in 2000 to just 31 million in 2014. Fujifilm continues to scale back its roll film offerings and raise prices, repeatedly saying that demand is drying up."

As I remarked a shrinking market. Hopefully sales will eventually stabilize before all of the film manufacturers go out of business. So it is not a friendly market for new offerings.
 
Last edited:

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
20,338
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
If you want to use Delta 3200 but eschew the grain you could try to expose it at 1200 iso and develop in Perceptol, full strength. I have not tried that myself but It may serve your purpose..."

I'd be interested to see examples if they exist within APUG of D3200, exposed at 1200 in Perceptol stock. I would have thought that if D3200 is in reality EI 1200 film at best and Perceptol stock reduces most film speed by a stop then for a full range of tones in Perceptol stock I'd have thought that the D3200 speed has to be about 600.

So the trade-off for Perceptol stock and lower grain is a reduction in speed to not much more than half a stop better than HP5+ gives

I put a lot of store in the truth of the saying: "There is no such thing as a free lunch"

However I have to say that I have seen pictures in the Gallery which look good in D3200 at EI 12,500, albeit the negs were 120 not 35mm

pentaxuser
 
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,715
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
I have had very good results with 3200 Delta in Ilfotech DD-X. I have even pushed it to 12,500 and though the grain was obvious at that speed it was still pleased with the results. This was 120 roll film though not 35mm. Picture is Ilford Delta 3200 @ 12,500 in DD-X taken on an 1936 Zeiss folder indoors with ambient light (8"x10" print). Ilford recommends DD-X for their tabular grain films. It is expensive but consistent and easy to use.

I agree with this. Ilfotec DD-X really works well with Delta 3200. I love it in acutance developers like Rodinal and FX-39 though, to really emphasize the grain, so that works for me too. What's cool about Delta 3200 is that in spite of its grainy qualities, it has surprisingly good resolution! I've printed 35mm D3200 negs to 16x20 print size, and I see the a similar amount of detail that I see with FP4, believe it or not.
 

StoneNYC

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Aug 5, 2012
Messages
8,345
Location
Antarctica
Format
8x10 Format
I've made 12x12 prints with D3200 shot at 3200 that didn't show much grain.

That was also souped in DD-X not perceptol.

Also, again, D3200 is 1000 speed, not 1200 or 1600.

image.jpeg
 

Xmas

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Sep 4, 2006
Messages
6,398
Location
UK
Format
35mm RF
For another 'fast' film to exist commercially it would need to be faster, smaller grain than Delta3200, and cheaper.

Kodak stopped Tmax3200 cause it was not selling in volume.

Foma stoppped 800 ditto...

Fuji...

If Adox could with their new coater they might, but there are better opportunities?

It is do we either lose another coater first or get a fast film first. If you put money on horsies noses...
 
OP
OP

jojoman2

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 21, 2015
Messages
147
Format
35mm RF
I still have a few rolls of 3200 that I stashed away, having been put off by the film. I'll give it another shot. I just bought some rodinal for fun.

To be honest, I'm really shooting much more color film nowadays and only shooting b&w when I need to push film. I like the poetry of color. Black and white absolutely has its uses, but I think the main strength of b&w is simply how graphic an image can be when stripped to bare essentials. b&w also pushes me to shoot differently. with color I find I hang back more while shooting b&w is typically more intense for me. I get closer. take more risks. I'm looking to shoot high speed b&w to accentuate the grittiness. It could be delta 3200 is what I'm really looking for but I just haven't wrangled in the grain yet in a pleasing way. I'll see if I can find a photo I've taken with 3200 to post.

Thanks all for weighing in
 

Black Dog

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 21, 2003
Messages
4,291
Location
Running up that hill
Format
Multi Format
DDX is as good as any developer for D3200 IME.
 
OP
OP

jojoman2

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 21, 2015
Messages
147
Format
35mm RF
Dead Link Removed

This is the last time I shot 3200. The grain isn't huge, but I don't find it particularly pleasing. D76 1:1

I hear you guys recommending DDX. Would rodinal have a similar effect?
 
OP
OP

jojoman2

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 21, 2015
Messages
147
Format
35mm RF
For practical purposes, I would rather steer this conversation toward 35mm. Pushing 120 is a whole different ballgame than 35mm
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
20,338
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
For practical purposes, I would rather steer this conversation toward 35mm. Pushing 120 is a whole different ballgame than 35mm

I thought pushing was pushing, largely irrespective of the film size. Can you explain what you mean by the second sentence? Thanks

pentaxuser
 
OP
OP

jojoman2

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 21, 2015
Messages
147
Format
35mm RF
I thought pushing was pushing, largely irrespective of the film size. Can you explain what you mean by the second sentence? Thanks

pentaxuser

120 has smaller grain--I've pushed 120 tri x to 1600 and the grain is around the same size as shooting 35mm tri x at box speed. grain size and appearance is more apparent when pushing 35mm, in my experience
 

Ian Grant

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
23,409
Location
West Midland
Format
Multi Format
I thought pushing was pushing, largely irrespective of the film size. Can you explain what you mean by the second sentence? Thanks

pentaxuser

It is the same vregardless of format. Before Christmas I push processed some Hp5 sheet film exposed at approx 3200 EI and was amazed at the lack of grain on a significant enlargement.


I hear you guys recommending DDX. Would rodinal have a similar effect?

No, sometimes a film/developer combination is less than ideal for keeping grain under control, D3200 gives it's best in DDX amd will be much grainier in Rodinal.

Ian
 
OP
OP

jojoman2

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 21, 2015
Messages
147
Format
35mm RF
it's a flawed comparison, but... Both are developed in D76 @ 68 degrees for 12 minutes

35mm tri x @ 1600
Dead Link Removed

120 tri x @ 1600
Dead Link Removed
 

Ian Grant

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
23,409
Location
West Midland
Format
Multi Format
120 has smaller grain--I've pushed 120 tri x to 1600 and the grain is around the same size as shooting 35mm tri x at box speed. grain size and appearance is more apparent when pushing 35mm, in my experience

The grain is similar in 35mm, 120 and sheet film for the same emulsion, you're confusing the degree of enlargement needed to make the same sized prints. The print from my HP5 LF negative pushed to 3200 was a section from a 30x24 enlargement equivalent to roughly a 10x8 print from 35mm.

Ian
 

Gerald C Koch

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
8,131
Location
Southern USA
Format
Multi Format
120 has smaller grain--I've pushed 120 tri x to 1600 and the grain is around the same size as shooting 35mm tri x at box speed. grain size and appearance is more apparent when pushing 35mm, in my experience

I believe you are ignoring the difference in magnification used to produce a 6x6 format print and a 35mm one. Tri-X is the same emulsion whether supplied on 35mm base or 120 base.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom