fschifano
Allowing Ads
Honestly speaking, i really love Acros 100, the 2 rolls i did at 100 were amazing, loved it and i was looking to make it my favorite, but this film has some debates on some websites about reciprocity, and i don't know what is that, so i make it out until i understand more about it then i will think about it again.
Reciprocity failure, or more accurately reciprocity departure, in it simplest explanation simply means that the film's real speed is lower when the exposing light is very dim and long exposures are required. With some films, the effect is rather dramatic. Exposures that meter for 10 seconds will actually need 20 seconds to get the right exposure with some films. Read through the tech sheets for Kodak's and Ilford's films. They outline just how much exposure you need to add for very long exposures. Some films require an extra stop of exposure when the exposure called for is as short as 1 second.
My recommendation? Fuji Acros or TMX, and these days I'm leaning more towards Acros. I just love that stuff. I use in medium format for very low light and night time photography where it's actually faster than some 400 speed films because of its outstanding reciprocity characteristics. Not only that, but the grain is, for all intents and purposes, non-existent, and the tonality is just right. I'm very impressed with this film, and the fact that it sells for less than the Kodak and Ilford equivalents makes it all the more attractive. Fuji's got a real winner with this one in my book.
Reciprocity departure issues with Fuji Acros? Not really. Straight from Fuji's tech sheet "No exposure compensation is required at shutter speed of less tan 120 seconds." That's pretty darned impressive if you ask me, and I don't think there's another film that can beat it. Delta 100 and TMax 100 don't even come close. Delta 400 and TMY-2, while not too bad, require even more compensation. Plus-X, Tri-X, FP4+, and HP5+ all have extremely poor reciprocity departure characteristics in comparison, and IMO should not even be considered for extremely low light work unless one is forced into the situation.
Good old Ilford FP4 Plus is still a great all-round film."from what i did before out of those films Ilford won my votes."
Interested, nice to know about that.
In all cases, i will keep using different films until i see one film or 2 will suit me more on most conditions or most of the time.
Thanks!
Good old Ilford FP4 Plus is still a great all-round film.
I have to check my all films, because i think i still didn't use that film yet and i would like to badly.
Another way to look at this is to print small. An acquaintance of mine who's a great photographer and Leica user never goes bigger than 6 x 4". Although he generally rates Tri-X at 200asa a superficial glance looks like a sheet film shot, virtually grain free.
My favourite slow film was Agfapan APX 25 but I'm down to the last four rolls. Currently experimenting with Lucky rated 50asa. The film lacks or has an inefficient anti-halation layer, which gives splendid light bleed on back lit subjects and while not ultra fine grain, works for small prints.
When you get some FP4 get a few rolls of Pan F as well.
A friend of mine, Bill Spears, uses it in Perceptol with his RB67 and the results are stunning, he's just been named B&W printer (analog) of the year by B&W Magazine (UK), he won another category to, and the previous year as well.
I have a few rolls I'm using with my little Large format camera, an 1880/90's Quarter plate camera, I've made a 6x7 conversion for it.
Agfa's AP25 and then APX25 were probably the finest slow films made, the quality and resolution was outstanding, PanF is close but needs careful exposure & processing.
Ian
Tareq
Reciprocity failure is really no big deal. If you know your film, you just compensate for it. In any case, it is no reason to select or not use a film. One advice I can offer is not to try too many films, developers, paper... anything. You are far better of to select a name brand product or a product recommended by someone who's word you trust. Learn that one product inside and out before you try another, or you will enter the endless loop of trial and error.
I have been tested 2 rolls of Pan F+, the results were amazing, my mind was blown away with what i see, could be a great film i want to use but i can't give it all the whistles yet.
Here are few results from it
http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/9054/img076n.jpg
http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/4559/img081nu.jpg
http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/1189/img074.jpg
http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/9281/img080v.jpg
Nice images Tareg. Not sure I'd use Pan F there, I think Delta 100 or FP4 would just have an edge because you could use a higher shutter speed.
What's more important is your finding your own way of working, and that's important, only you can decide how you work.
Ian
You're on the right track there Tareq. Find the film you like then stick with it. Keep Pan F as a an option for tripod work or landscapes
Ian
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?