Recommendations for cheap B&W film & developers

[gone]

Moving from Kodak films and developers, so the low end of the food chain may be a good place to start. Most of the Ilford films have been in my cameras, but not others. Freestyle has Kentmere, Arista and Fomapan on their budget rack. Is anyone shooting these, and what developers do you use? 100 to 400 ISO is fine.

This would be for darkroom printing if it makes any difference. I'm in the US.

 

[Helge]

I don’t know how expensive the Agfa Aviphot rebrands are where you are, but they are generally excellent and interesting films.
Almost all of Adox and Rolleis film are Aviphot in different wrappers (and probably with different QC and other special treatments).

They are contrasty, very, very high resolution, not hard to get good results from, extent into the upper infrared spectrum, which is very useful with any kind of filtering, scan well, are a joy to put on the reel and develop and can be turned to slides quite easily, because of their clear base.

 

[runswithsizzers]

I've only shot one roll of Kentmere 100, but I think it looks pretty good (scanned negatives <here>). That roll was processed in Kodak D-76 developer at 1+1. If you are shooting medium format, they should look even better than my results from 135.

Meanwhile, I've decided I'll be happier shooting ISO 400 film, so I just put a few rolls of Kentmere 400 in my shopping cart. Fingers crossed that the grain will not be too prominent.

 

[gone]

The Rollei films look interesting, but they're pricier than the Tri-X I was shooting. Unfortunately, Freestyle doesn't list the Agfa Avipho films.

 

[Helge]

The Rollei films look interesting, but they're pricier than the Tri-X I was shooting. Unfortunately, Freestyle doesn't list the Agfa Avipho films.

They won’t. They are not released to the public as that.

Foma film has a good fan base. I have never tried them myself but I really should.
You are not going to get cheaper in Europe. Don’t know about US.
I’ve only heard of a little QC trouble with Foma. But for being roughly half the price of Ilford I could live with that and smile on top.

 

[xtol121]

Kentmere 400 and Tri-X 400 have pretty much the same exact curve in XTOL 1+1, except Kentmere has a higher base fog. 0.18 for 400TX @ 6.5m, 0.28 for K400 @ 9m. Not sure if the base fog has anything to do with it but I find Kentmere to be grainier, but a great cheap alternative to Tri-X. I buy 100' rolls of it for shoots where I don't mind the extra graininess. I develop them both to print well at grade 3. My readings of 400TX (blue) and K400 (green) attached below.

FWIW I think Foma 400/Arista 400 are best left for testing to see if your fixer is still working. It takes a lot of exposure and a lot of developing to build density in my experience, but I guess at least it's cheap and available in all formats unlike Kentmere 400.

 

[destroya]

best cheap film i have shot in a while is ultrafine Xtreme 100, but its out of stock (120, but they have bulk rolls) and has been for a while. not sure they will ever get it back in stock. otherwise, RR400s bulk rolls (you did not specify a size of film) ordered from Germany are the way to go.
john

 

[Alan9940]

Keep an eye out for expired film for sale here and on LFPF; some good deals to be had. If you want to buy new, IMO Foma 100 is a pretty good film at a decent price. I buy a couple hundred sheets of 8x10 from fotoimpex when I'm getting close to running out; well, before the pandemic changed everything. If you want a really good developer at the least expense, check out D-23. You'll have to mix it yourself, but that's easy.

 

[AnselMortensen]

I use Arista 400 EDU (120) and Rodinal.

 

[albireo]

FWIW I think Foma 400/Arista 400 are best left for testing to see if your fixer is still working.

I think otherwise. In the right hands, well exposed and developed the way it deserves, Foma 100/200/400 can produce exhibition-grade prints than neither I, you or anyone else would be able to distinguish in an ABX blind test from those obtained using for example overpriced Kodak black and white film.

 

[darkosaric]

I use Fomapan in Rodinal. For Foma 400 I use 1+50, for Foma 100 I use 1+100. Both are good films, here are 2 examples from 100 and 2 examples from 400:

 

[removed account4]

foma and caffenol c mixed with a shot ofansco 130
I I used/ use home roasted Sumatra beans and make 3-4l at a time and re-use unreplenished for months. Costs pennies / roll . D23 or rodinal or d72 might ( or ansco 130 )will work too.

 

[eatfrog]

I don’t know how expensive the Agfa Aviphot rebrands are where you are, but they are generally excellent and interesting films.
Almost all of Adox and Rolleis film are Aviphot in different wrappers.

Rollei yes, Adox no. Adox does not reroll aviphot.

 

[Jonno85uk]

I'd also vote for Foma 400 + Rodinal if you want cheap.
However, i'm not a fan of the combo; I don't find the grain to be pleasing in 35mm or 120. Ilfotec HC is a better compromise IMO. Xtol-R is a cheap alternative and what I use with the film.

 

[Helge]

Rollei yes, Adox no. Adox does not reroll aviphot.

They seem to be pretty open about their film being “something else” though.
HR-50 and Retro 80s are very close to each other for instance.
It also seems to be the common idea that the Aviphot films are the source (apart from Adox CMS 20 II and Silvermax perhaps).

 

[Ernst-Jan]

They seem to be pretty open about their film being “something else” though.
HR-50 and Retro 80s are very close to each other for instance.
It also seems to be the common idea that the Aviphot films are the source (apart from Adox CMS 20 II and Silvermax perhaps).

Do you have any source for this? As far as I know, they make all their current films themselves. They have HR50 with and without speedboost. Without being a "beta version"
How would you explain a beta version if they sell a product right of the shelf?

 

[Don_ih]

Moving from Kodak films and developers, so the low end of the food chain may be a good place to start. Most of the Ilford films have been in my cameras, but not others. Freestyle has Kentmere, Arista and Fomapan on their budget rack. Is anyone shooting these, and what developers do you use? 100 to 400 ISO is fine.

This would be for darkroom printing if it makes any difference. I'm in the US.

Looking at your media images, you've already used Foma (in Arista packaging). You would probably find Kentmere a good choice, since you like strong contrast. Buying bulk chemicals and mixing your own D76 is the cheapest way to get a very useful developer.
Kodak would likely sell more film if they acted like they wanted to sell film.

 

[Helge]

Do you have any source for this? As far as I know, they make all their current films themselves. They have HR50 with and without speedboost. Without being a "beta version"
How would you explain a beta version if they sell a product right of the shelf?

It been discussed at length already. Do a search here and on google.
Again, they look very alike too.
Adox confectioning is of higher standard it seems though.
Speed Boost appears to be real (whatever it is) and the price difference in Denmark is not big at all (less than $1).

The beta stuff is allegedly from their experiments with Speed Boost. It’s going to be sold out eventually.

 

[Donald Qualls]

There is no cheaper film than Arista .EDU Ultra -- this rebranded Fomapan undercuts Foma prices by a small amount. I like the 100 and 400 a lot; it's the only B&W I try to never be without.

For developer, it's hard to beat Parodinal for cost. If you buy acetaminophen in large bottles and can get the cost under a couple cents a tablet, you can make Parodinal at a final cost for 1:50 of around a nickel a roll. Homemade plain hypo fixer (pool supply thiosulfate -- sold as chlorine reducer -- and Amazon-sourced sodium sulfite) can run in the same range (240 g/L thiosulfate and 100 g/L sulfite has a capacity of 16-20 rolls).

 

[radiant]

https://www.fotoimpex.de/shop/fotochemie/adox-adofix-p-ii-zum-ansatz-von-5000-ml.html

Enough for 50 films (and you can really do 100) for 9 euros. 18 cents per film or extended 9 cents per film.

Rodinal:

https://www.fotoimpex.de/shop/fotochemie/adox-rodinal-500-ml-konzentrat.html?cache=1618488142

100 films for 13 euros, that is 13 cents per film.

So total 13+9 = 22 cents per film. Does it need to be cheaper, really?

 

[JWMster]

Sooooo ADOX's purchase of a new facilities and the story they sell about confecting their own film is all a fake? Forgive me for being a bit credulous, but I'm not sure why they'd go to the trouble and considerable capital expense merely to put a different wrapper on someone else's film. Basically Helge is telling us that this is all a head fake? Maybe... but ...and I think I'm pretty much aware of the buzz out on the internet, but I've not actually seen or heard this claim of quackery before. Doesn't mean its wrong... just that my eyebrows are raised.

And yes, Rollei is a label, but ADOX seems to be more than a storefront and have real people. FWIW, I tend to see them as a project in transition and it is still unclear to me what the goal is and where they're headed, but I'm giving it a whirl and about to receive some CHS II so I'll find out whether its worth the bother. Want to run this side-by-side with FP4 and see whether there really is a difference. FP4 and CHS II are now about neck-and-neck in pricing here in the states, and if you told me that the purchase of Ilford's plant by ADOX some years back was really part of some not noised deal for Ilford to produce the film for them... I might tend to consider that within the realm of "yeah... makes sense".... at least as they get up to speed, and maybe even more.

But I'm all wet and don't know anything. In either case, lots of folks like Bergger, and no one ever accused them of doing more than contracting for production either. But to their credit, the Bergger folks never claimed to walk you around their film production or rolling plant the way ADOX does.

 

[Wallendo]

UltraFine Xtreme is very good and cheap film, but currently unavailable, PhotoWarehouse now has UltraFine Finesse available, but it is new and there are not a lot of online reports about it. I am currently shooting a 100 foot roll of this, and still trying to figure it out. It its not a bad film, but it isn't TX400 either. The Xtreme films were very good and looked very similar to Kentmere.
Kentmere is made in the same factory by the same people who make Ilford films and is a good affordable choice. There are also rumors that UltraFine Xtreme is rebadged Kentmere, or something very similar.
Foma and Arista EDU are the same film. These films have a somewhat different spectral response. It is a look I like, but many don't. I shoot a lot of Fomapan 100 because I like the film, not because of its low cost.

As for developers, Freestyle's L110 (HC-110 clone) is fairly cheap and develops a lot of film. The 1 gallon packet of D76 is also reasonable priced. I don't mix my own chemicals because, quite frankly, I don't have the time. I find that a batch of XTOL lasts me about 6 months. At that rate, it doesn't make much sense for me to try to save a few pennies.

 

[Paul Howell]

My current film and developer combo is Foma 200 in 35mm, 120 and 4X5 or 400 in 35mm with Clayton F76+ which I buy as Arista House brand in smaller bottles. In the past I shot a lot of Ultra Xtreme 100 and 400 and developed in a wide range of developers including MCM 100, D76 and it's various clones, all work rather well. I'm waiting for PhotoWarehouse to get more xtreme in 400 as I need DX coding when shooting my point and shoots.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Sooooo ADOX's purchase of a new facilities and the story they sell about confecting their own film is all a fake? Forgive me for being a bit credulous, but I'm not sure why they'd go to the trouble and considerable capital expense merely to put a different wrapper on someone else's film.

Adox CHS 100 II is the "in house" manufactured film.

 

[lantau]

For cheap film I think there are only two manufacturers. Harman making their budget film sold as Kentmere and und other Brands. Getting them in bulk rolls under the Agfaphoto label is probably the cheapest way to use modern 35mm film with fully usable box speed, at least in the German market. I'd recommend this, because they are universal films with good quality. I may have made my very first print from a negative on a roll of Agfaphoto APX 100 (new=Kentmere).

Foma is even cheaper. Technically less advanced and old fashioned, it is truly great film if you are after what it is offering.

In a nutshell; get a Kentmere under whichever label is the cheapest for you to get. You won't get anything technically better for the price. If you think you like the characteristics of Foma and are able to give its more sensitive emulsion the careful darkroom handling, which it requires, then go for Foma and its labels.

Both are available in bulk rolls.