Old fashioned film ???

[thefizz]

When a B&W film is described as old fashioned, what differences would this film have compared to a modern one.

Efke iso 25 film is said to give an early to mid 20th century look. Does this old look apply to portraits only or landscapes etc.

Retrophotographic have a new Classic Pan 100 eco film which they say has a real '50s' look. What look is this.

Thanks,
Peter

 

[noseoil]

Marketing hype. Define an "old look". This is like "silver rich" and other BS. tim

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Perhaps the biggest difference between "old" and "new" is the silver grain structure - is it a t-grain (tabular grain - where the silver grains are a uniform shape and size, and so produce a finer grain structure for a given speed) or not. Films like Efke, Tri-x, FP4+, Bergger BRF, etc. are all "old" style non- t-grain films. Tmax, Fuji Acros, the Ilford Delta films are all t-grain films. T-grain films are often marked by stronger contrast along with finer grain, and sometimes have a harsher look because of it. The "old" films have a smoother, more gradual tonality, but stronger grain and somewhat less contrast. Of course, the contrast is highly controllable with changes in exposure and development. Grain size becomes a relative issue when you get up into larger formats, and becomes essentially a non-issue when you hit 8x10, unless you're cooking your chemicals in such a way to emphasize grain.

 

[avandesande]

My idea of an 'old film' is really a single-layer emulsion. The last of it's kind was super xx. Efke (adox) films were the pioneer of multi-layer films in the 50s, so in a way it is the old new film.

 

[jjstafford]

Efke really is different from modern non-tabular (T) grain films, and darned near an alien species compared to T-films.

Efke 25's color response is quite different from Tri-X 320 (for example). It is more green and red sensitive. Efke 100 PL has a beautiful exposure/density curve for my methods (Rodinal 1:50).

I don't know if I got a batch variant, but in 4x5 the film is ever so slighty wider in the 4" dimension so that it is an excellent fit in Elite holders; it does not sag or move in the holder.

Give it a try. It certainly is priced right.

 

[garryl]

I asked this question too--

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=007CnF

 

[thefizz]

Thanks for the info everyone.

 

[Ole]

Efke 25's color response is quite different from Tri-X 320 (for example). It is more green and red sensitive.

Blue and green, you mean? EFKE 25 and 50 are red-blind, not sensitive to red at all! While EFKE 100 is "normal" panchromatic.

My idea of an 'old film' is really a single-layer emulsion. The last of it's kind was super xx. Efke (adox) films were the pioneer of multi-layer films in the 50s, so in a way it is the old new film.

Ehrm... ADOX / EFKE were the pioneers of thin emulsion film, not multi-layer! EFKE 25 and 50 are both single-layer AFAIK. Super XX was the last of the thick-emulsion films.

 

[jjstafford]

Blue and green, you mean? EFKE 25 and 50 are red-blind, not sensitive to red at all! While EFKE 100 is "normal" panchromatic.

I am not comparing Efke 25 with Efke KB or PL 100, but Efke 25 with (for example) Tri-X 320.

I mean what I wrote. Efke 25 has a greater sensitivity to green and red (compared to blue) than Tri-X 320 film. Can you show me different information? Have you ever tried to develop Efke 25 under red safelight?

 

[richardmellor]

many people feel that foma films will give you a 1930s look .
people are saying that the house brand at freestyle is foma
great price too 1.39 a roll.

 

[Ole]

I am not comparing Efke 25 with Efke KB or PL 100, but Efke 25 with (for example) Tri-X 320.

I mean what I wrote. Efke 25 has a greater sensitivity to green and red (compared to blue) than Tri-X 320 film. Can you show me different information? Have you ever tried to develop Efke 25 under red safelight?

http://www.efkefilm.com/

http://www.jandcphotography.com/efkedata.htm

And my own experience, and all my photographic literature all the way back to Willi Beutler.

 

[jjstafford]

http://www.efkefilm.com/

http://www.jandcphotography.com/efkedata.htm

And my own experience, and all my photographic literature all the way back to Willi Beutler.

You are avoiding the point. It means nothing unless you put the data side-by-side with Tri-X 320 data.

Your experience? You said that Efke 25 is red-blind, and I asked if you have ever developed it under red safelight. You clearly have not or you wouldn't dare say that.

I wasn't born yesterday.

 

[eatfrog]

http://www.efkefilm.com/KB25spek.jpg
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/f9/f002_0360ac.gif

Spectral curves for Efke 25 and Tri-x.
Efke 25 is not "red-blind" but is not as sensitive for red as Tri-x. It is certainly not MORE sensitive to red.

 

[jjstafford]

eatfrog:

I appreciate the possible correction, but Efke's chart does not give the vertical scale we both need to make our points. I could point to relative comparisons, but we just plain need the correct Efke data.

 

[garryl]

As long as were into data--

I read the statement that Super-XX was the last "thick" emulsion film produced. All others after it were the "new" thin coating philosophy. Does anyone using Super-XX have any data that compares the coating thickness of it to modern films?

 

[Ole]

Your experience? You said that Efke 25 is red-blind, and I asked if you have ever developed it under red safelight. You clearly have not or you wouldn't dare say that.

I wasn't born yesterday.

I develop all my sheet film by inspection. For PL25 I use a red safelight, for all others a weak green one.

I have also used R50 for portraits, and seen red lips come out as black.

The vertical scale on the sensitivity charts is irrelevant - compare 25 and 50 with the 100! The sensitivity of 25 and 50 drop to zero at about 630nm, the KB100 goes to about 680nm, PL100 a little less but with higher sensitivity around 640.

Try using EFKE 25 withh a dark red filter. It should be easy to see if it comes out darker than expected from "standard" filter factors, or entirely blank.

 

[jjstafford]

I develop all
The vertical scale on the sensitivity charts is irrelevant - compare 25 and 50 with the 100! .

For gosh sake, how many times are you going to try change the issue? The comparison was 'old' style (efke 25) compared to Tri-X! The two charts given in that case were different - Kokak had vertical metrics and Efke had none!

 

[Mongo]

Your experience? You said that Efke 25 is red-blind, and I asked if you have ever developed it under red safelight. You clearly have not or you wouldn't dare say that.

I develop all my sheet film by inspection. For PL25 I use a red safelight, for all others a weak green one.

For gosh sake, how many times are you going to try change the issue?

Hmmmmm

 

[snaggs]

My dads bigger than your dad?

 

[jjstafford]

My dads bigger than your dad?

Happy Father's Day, snaggs! (Chances are I'm older than your Dad. No fights!)

 

[jjstafford]

Ole - Respectfully, I am not looking for disagreements. Development by inspection using a weak light of the film's least sensitive color is something I did, too. The fact that you don't use a green light with Efke 25 rather affirms that it might be more green sensitive than conventional films, no?

End of thread for me until I can find, or make, an authoritative source showing the log sensitivity of Efke 25 such as Kokak shows for Tri-X 320. It would benefit all of us to settle the matter with true metrics.

 

[Ronald Moravec]

All you have to do is figure out the filter exposure factor for a 25 red. With normal pan it is 3 stops. With Efke , iti s much more. I did it, but no longer use the film so I do not remember the exact number. 3 extra stops barely puts anything on the neg.

Orange and red filter require much greater correction.

 

[jjstafford]

All you have to do is figure out the filter exposure factor for a 25 red. With normal pan it is 3 stops. With Efke , iti s much more. I did it, but no longer use the film so I do not remember the exact number. 3 extra stops barely puts anything on the neg.

Orange and red filter require much greater correction.

Which begs the question; why use those filters if that part of the spectrum is practically missing already?

 

[garryl]

Which begs the question; why use those filters if that part of the spectrum is practically missing already?

What don't you like a challenge?

 

[jjstafford]

What don't you like a challenge?

Sisyphusian 'challenges' are not.