Myth of film

[mr rusty]

I want to ask something that may help me in the future, where i can buy prints [wet prints] of film. But only i want to buy it if i know which film,gear,chemicals were used

http://www.houseofilfordphoto.com/Seascape/

but you won't be able to reproduce exactly because although film negative origination and printed onto Ilford RC paper and wet developed, the bit in the middle is a lightjet printer.

 

[TareqPhoto]

@PDH: Yes, i know that, i have a feeling about that i can understand or see when i get there with film and know it is right, in fact i got it already with one film so far from the first time ever i used it, and there is another film is very close to be the second in that, so i am not far from it, but i am just keep doing with another film to see maybe there are more to see before i settle on one or 2 films i am already happy and sure about.

@Terry: thanks for your advice and or/opinion, i did start with one film and it was the most film i used to shoot and test with, and it became one of my favorite films so far, so i have no problem there, but i am still not ending this experience with film on 1 or 2 films, and who knows what will happen later or in very near future when i lose to find my favorite film, so i keep my favorite choices open until i can have enough choices there, Ilford sounds to be there available for decades coming, but Kodak and Fuji are always surprising or say shocking us with some bad news about discontinuity of some films, and i live in a country where it is nearly impossible to get many films, so if something is gone i may not able to get at all from online, and you can get it locally there, so i will try to have more choices to rely on with film that just stick with 1 film and developer then suddenly they are gone and i can't choose something else or better to say i don't know what else to choose, hope you got it.

@mr rusty: What is lightjet printer? And i wasn't planning to have exact results that if i can do, but at least i can have something as a reference or standard to let me know where is my place in my processing.

 

[Regular Rod]

Hey again,

So, after short time in film i did, i couldn't tell what or why or where i want to go with it, i just i keep shooting testing and process and then i don't know what i should do next, print or scan or just keep the rolls/sheets in archive.

Now, what is that in film you like and satisfy with? I mean without printing or scanning, how do you like your film to be? Contrasty, less grainy, full tones, ...etc.

When i develop different films so far until now, i just get results, and then i can't decide until i print as many may recommend or will say, but let's say if printing is not there, then how can you judge your film? I did test different films on different developers, let's say i tested 1 film on different developers, got different very similar results but all are good decent for me, then what to choose? same with 1 developer for different films, also getting nice results with all films except one film it may not be good for it but it is not the point, again, what to choose?

What is that myth of film making you to keep doing it? Or choosing a certain film over another? Or even certain developer, certain paper, certain whatever? I feel i just keep testing because i see many decent results from all film and developer then i can't end up with a favorite, sure i can narrow my top best but this doesn't mean i ignore the rest, i didn't like Tri-X because i liked TMAX400 and HP5+ more, but i saw many many outstanding masterpiece results from Delta 400 and Tri-X too, so i try and test Tri-X and Delta 400 to have that great results and i can get it also, then which 400 iso film i should choose? i am not talking about the subjects i am shooting, because it is always something you shoot that is important, but the film you choose and the processing things after it, how make you to decide and judge? Some go with 1 thing [1 film + 1 developer and chemicals + 1 paper,....etc], any enlighten here?

I didn't know where to post this topic, but i chose here because i am more thinking about B&W film.

Welcome to all opinions and

This may seem crazy, especially on this esteemed forum, but you may do better to ignore the opinions of others for a while. Just choose one film to start with. Leave the other films behind. Make some photographs BUT from now on don't expose until you have decided what you want your photograph to look like (and maybe why you want to make the photograph). Go and develop the film and make your print. Look at your photograph and decide: Is it as you wanted it to be? Yes? Move on to the next photograph and repeat the approach all over again. On the occasions when the photograph is not as you wanted it to be, decide for yourself where the failure to comply with your intentions is and take that into account next time. Just keep working away until you can usually get what you originally wanted. Doing it this way you then have a base from which to deviate later on with different films, formats, developers, papers and so on.

It takes a while. Fortunately the pleasure of making this journey of discovery is enough to keep you interested and happy at the way you gradually take control of your photography...


RR

 

[Fixcinater]

I use a bunch of different films and formats, but only because I've been trying to settle down to just a couple pieces of equipment. Film choice is heading that same way, with basically a slow and a fast option for each format.

Pentax 6x7 whenever I can lug it around + Acros 100 in daylight, TMAX 400 when there is less light or I want to keep shutter speeds up in general. I'll likely transition over to full Ilford film within the next couple years, as I see them being around for longer than Fuji/Kodak, but that bridge will get crossed when I come to it.

35mm rangefinder with a 50mm when I can't carry the big P67 + whatever I have, generally Plus-X and Tri-X.


All of it gets souped in whatever developer I have, so I went through a bunch of D76 and now I'm pretty much sticking with HC110 since it's so simple and quick to use at 1+49. Low agitation suits my tastes and I generally run everything at 8 minutes, unless it's cold in the bathroom where I soup film.



Long story short: I keep it simple because testing gets old for me very fast, and I'm not picky enough at present to think a shot is ruined by film/developer choice. I screw it up more than the film/dev choice ever could.

 

[TareqPhoto]

Well, what else to say, i really appreciate all posts here, and good to know you keep what you do, and sure i will have mine as well, and i am not giving up, until now Acros and TMAX400 are my best films i can use and i am sure about, let's see for how long they will be around and how long i can hold on them.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I think perhaps you are approaching this a little backwards.

In my opinion it's important to foremost figure out what you want to photograph. Then you practice to become good at it and come up with good ways of presenting your work.
What film and developer to choose? Pick one that you like, and then move on to make more photographs! The more you practice with the film and developer you selected, the better you will become at it.

Eventually you will reach a level of skill where you will appreciate consistency from your materials and testing film becomes something you do when you're forced to, because you can't get what you normally use anymore.

But focus on WHY you photograph in the first place, and the rest will fall into place.

Hey again,

So, after short time in film i did, i couldn't tell what or why or where i want to go with it, i just i keep shooting testing and process and then i don't know what i should do next, print or scan or just keep the rolls/sheets in archive.

Now, what is that in film you like and satisfy with? I mean without printing or scanning, how do you like your film to be? Contrasty, less grainy, full tones, ...etc.

When i develop different films so far until now, i just get results, and then i can't decide until i print as many may recommend or will say, but let's say if printing is not there, then how can you judge your film? I did test different films on different developers, let's say i tested 1 film on different developers, got different very similar results but all are good decent for me, then what to choose? same with 1 developer for different films, also getting nice results with all films except one film it may not be good for it but it is not the point, again, what to choose?

What is that myth of film making you to keep doing it? Or choosing a certain film over another? Or even certain developer, certain paper, certain whatever? I feel i just keep testing because i see many decent results from all film and developer then i can't end up with a favorite, sure i can narrow my top best but this doesn't mean i ignore the rest, i didn't like Tri-X because i liked TMAX400 and HP5+ more, but i saw many many outstanding masterpiece results from Delta 400 and Tri-X too, so i try and test Tri-X and Delta 400 to have that great results and i can get it also, then which 400 iso film i should choose? i am not talking about the subjects i am shooting, because it is always something you shoot that is important, but the film you choose and the processing things after it, how make you to decide and judge? Some go with 1 thing [1 film + 1 developer and chemicals + 1 paper,....etc], any enlighten here?

I didn't know where to post this topic, but i chose here because i am more thinking about B&W film.

Welcome to all opinions and

 

[RalphLambrecht]

TTake it or leave it. I try to keep things simple, but I'm also confident with a few relatively simple tests I could make virtually any general purpose film/developer combination work.

The better you get at controlling your processing, and the more skill you develop as a printer, the less the particular film will matter. There are some marvelous printers who use only one film and developer, and there are also some marvelous printers who use whatever film they can get their hands on.

+1very well said. I strive for the former and admire the latter.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Whether we admit it or not, we all eventually develop our own style, defined by our shooting, developing and printing. And at some point you might pick a combination you are happy with and generally stick to it.

Part of the fun is trying everything, (while we still can) and different films do have different "looks", ranging from subtle to dramatic. I have my favorite that I always keep a camera loaded with. But I also generally have 2-3 cameras loaded with other films. I'll shoot anything, expired, off brand, oddball and unknown, but when it counts Its all Tri-X in HC-110.

Yes, or Tmax400in D76 +1with me

 

[eddie]

What film and developer to choose? Pick one that you like, and then move on to make more photographs! The more you practice with the film and developer you selected, the better you will become at it.

Great advice... I'd also add that the learning curve for making a good print is longer than learning to make a good negative. Making prints is the only way to know whether you're making good negatives (if you are entirely analog). Print a lot. Then, print a lot more.

As for your film / developer choice, I'd choose based on how easy it is to get in the UAE. If you need to order it all from overseas, I'd opt for a long lasting developer (Rodinal/HC110), and order enough for a year, or two.

 

[Loris Medici]

As an example:

I use two films and only one developer (all for 6x9 or 4x5); HP5 and FP4. I use HP5 when the light is too contrasty, FP4 when the light is dull. All my films gets souped in Pyrocat-MC. Have tried C41 films (both offerings from Ilford and Kodak), Pan F, Delta's, Tri X's, T Max's and D76, Xtol. This is where I landed in the end. There's no need to complicate things...

Regards,
Loris.

 

[Pioneer]

I'm with you TareqPhoto. I can see more difference between the rendering of a Sonnar 50/1.5 and a Planar 50/2 than I can between most black and white films. And to be perfectly truthful I have really given up worrying too much about it. I have no misconceptions about my artistic style. I just shoot with whatever I have and enjoy myself.

 

[Bill Burk]

I want to ask something that may help me in the future, where i can buy prints [wet prints] of film? But only i want to buy it if i know which film,gear,chemicals were used to produce that print, because if i like a print a bought then this will make me to focus on doing the same or getting closer to the result, rather than i keep testing and testing [i mean shoot always] and still i don't know what i look for or to expect.

Here of course.

All the photography in the galleries is encouraged to have been produced by darkroom techniques, so a high percentage of what you see is what you might be looking for.

As we upload, we are given prompts to enter the film, paper and other technical information which you might find helpful.

 

[TareqPhoto]

Thanks!

I will keep reading, posting, discussing about film until the time i can have a style or a method i can rely on or let's say i feel comfortable with.

One day, i hope to visit a gallery where i can see some works done in darkroom, in my country there is none or very few that i don't know about, i hope i can start to print one day sooner or later, i was planning to do that by 2011 or 2012, but when my dad died by end of 2010 everything changed and many plans are gone.

 

[markbarendt]

Now, what is that in film you like and satisfy with? I mean without printing or scanning, how do you like your film to be? Contrasty, less grainy, full tones, ...etc.

I think the qualification you use to refine your question here is flawed. Too much importance is being attributed to the film.

First; A negative is just a storage device, not a display medium. Without taking the next step and making it in to a positive (one way or another) the qualities you speak of don't mean much.

Second; A negative is just one link in a long chain and each link (choice) contributes and modifies the result. The final photo (print or whatever) is a combination of all the qualities combined; scene, lighting, lens, exposure choices, film emulsion, film size, paper choice, print grade, print size, print lighting, viewing distance ............ The list goes on and on.

That is part of what makes using negatives special for me, it isn't about a fixed, absolute, given look; it's about all the possibilities it allows. The medium is malleable, adjustable, flexible, and forgiving, while still being predictable. I get to pick what I want to put on the negative, where I put it on the negative, and then pick what I pull out and put on the paper.