Starting out with b&w film

[reub2000]

I suggest getting a film retriever---a little metal thingy that slips into the lips of a 35mm cartridge and will pull the little leader of film out so you can insert it into the patterson reel and start racheting it onto the spool.

Just leave the film leader out. When using a mechanical camera, listen for when the film is released from the take up spool. When using electronic camera, set the appropriate option for leaving the leader out.

I don't know why, but I like to play around the empty cartridges. Something to fiddle around to keep my hands busy.

SO..........start with large format film and bypass the whole issue. Develop in trays.

Good idea.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Why one film? Because as with most new endeavors, success early on is good for morale. Sticking with a combination that has a track record in both college and high school darkrooms is certainly one way of accomplishing that end.

Dear John,

Sorry, I could not disagree more strongly. Someone else's track record is completely irrelevant -- I want a film that works for ME, not in someone's college or high-school darkroom. And besides, 'success early on' might well come with another film, not the one you choose at random or on someone else's recommendation.

As I said before, I'd be surprised if the OP didn't prefer either HP5 or Tri-X. Few, I think, would deny that they have a different 'look'; most would say they preferred one or the other.

To me, this clearly demonstrates the advantage of trying as many films as possible at first, and picking the one you like. To do otherwise would be to decide on your childhood sweetheart at the age of 12 (before you had even spoken to her), then assiduously wooing her and marrying her ten years later without ever talking to any other girls in the intervening years.

Or to put it another way, my favourite ISO 125 film in 35mm is Fomapan 200T (I prefer FP4 in cut film and I go to ISO 100 with Delta in 120 but that's another story). If I were forced to use FP4 in 35mm I could probably learn to get better results than I get now, but I'd still prefer Fomapan 200T. Most people agree that FP4 is a better film in every way. For them, they are right. I just prefer Fomapan. Why force me to use a film I don't like as well?

Cheers,

R.

 

[copake_ham]

Very interesting thread. I cannot add anything - but I sure leaned a lot!

Thanks to the OP for getting this going!

 

[hywel]

Just leave the film leader out.

No I say. Always wind it back in. Surest way to ensure you never double expose a film. And get a film retreiver. Doesn't take more than five seconds, which is quicker than I can pop the bottom off.

Hywel

 

[jim appleyard]

No I say. Always wind it back in. Surest way to ensure you never double expose a film. And get a film retreiver. Doesn't take more than five seconds, which is quicker than I can pop the bottom off.

Hywel

Whatever works for you, however, reels are easier to load if you start them with the lights on, especially stainless. If you can manage to leave the film leader outside the cartridge, you can cut it off square, fold it over, whatever you need to do to mark it in some way so you know that it's been expsosed. Then, load it on the reel, off with the lights, and roll away.

It's hard to belive, but there are still photography teachers who insist that the film MUST be loaded entirely in the dark!

 

[reub2000]

No I say. Always wind it back in. Surest way to ensure you never double expose a film. And get a film retreiver. Doesn't take more than five seconds, which is quicker than I can pop the bottom off.

Hywel

I carry a sharpie in my camera bag to mark used film canisters.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I carry a sharpie in my camera bag to mark used film canisters.

And if you're in a hurry? Or you've changed camera bags and not moved the Sharpie? Or indeed if you're not carrying a camera bag? I'm with Hywel.

Cheers,

R.

 

[reub2000]

And if you're in a hurry? Or you've changed camera bags and not moved the Sharpie? Or indeed if you're not carrying a camera bag? I'm with Hywel.

Cheers,

R.

Or maybe put the sharpie in your pocket? I haven't any problems with double exposures that way.

 

[Paul.]

I am also with Hywel, once the leader is retived from the canister it can be cut flat and started on the reel in the light. I used to open the canister untill severly lasserated fingers and blood soaked film convinced me of the error of my ways.
Regards Paul.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Or maybe put the sharpie in your pocket? I haven't any problems with double exposures that way.

It's very much a question of world-picture -- and of what you shoot. Some people (you) will remember the Sharpie. Some (me) won't.

Also, if e.g. I am shooting the Tibetan Losar (New Year) celebrations on the roof of Thekchen Choeling at dawn, I just don't have TIME to dig out Sharpies and annotate film cartridges (NEVER the canisters).

As my wife Frances Schultz pointed out, "We can't even find Sharpies at home. I'd rather waste half a roll of film than double-expose it."

Cheers,

R

 

[reub2000]

The other reason that I carry a sharpie around is that I sometimes like to switch rolls mid-roll. I use the sharpie to mark the frame number on the half-exposed film. I remember to pack a sharpie in my bag out of habit.

Another option not mentioned is to bulk load the film. Reusable cartridges can be opened easier than a preloaded cartridge.

 

[Paul Howell]

Another option is to use a tank and apron instead of reels. I used aprons in high school and even in college before moving on to SS and plastic reels. Freestyle carries a tank and apron for around $5.00. Never had a problem with apons, cant say the same for either SS or plastic reels.

 

[Mike Té]

Dear Arkady,
Finally, try and do some optical printing as soon as you can. Personally, I find darkoom work to be the most enjoyable part of the process.
Neal Wydra

Arkady, hopefully you'll take Neal's advice and start looking for an enlarger at some point. If you feel that film can increase the quality quotient of your art, take it a bit further and get into the many fine silver photographic papers that are available.

 

[David Grenet]

I tend to leave the leader out but put a sharp fold in it. No need for a sharpie and it'll make me think twice if I go to reload...

 

[rmartin]

Finally, try and do some optical printing as soon as you can. Personally, I find darkoom work to be the most enjoyable part of the process.

Neal Wydra

I absolutely agree with Neal. I started the same way the OP did with a scanner. I then found a cheap B600 on the auction site after about 3 years. Silver printing added a whole new level of enjoyment! As my printing skills improved (although still *very* limited :rolleyes: ) I would go back to old negatives to try to print them better. This is compared to rarely, if ever, going back to old files. Since I upgraded to a D5500, the bathroom that doubled as a darkroom has turned into a darkroom that does duty as a bathroom ;-).

There is still nothing cooler than seeing the image start to emerge on paper in the developer.

 

[pentaxuser]

Arcady. What none of us can do for you is to begin to describe the feeling you'll get when you have finished the fixing and can then open the tank and look at the first few negs and remember taking them and now having them in front of you. It's the "I made this" moment that happens every time I process and is as strong now as the first time.

All that remains is a wash, then the wetting agent and drying. Looking at the negs under a loupe heightens the pleasure and if you go on to enlarging and printing the best is yet to come.

If scanning is the only option available then so be it but if you get an opportunity, give darkroom printing a try. It's the feeling Chippendale must have got when he made chairs compared to the guy at the control panel of a furniture machine line who does everything via a keyboard.

Once you've "lived it" there's no going back. Welcome on board.

pentaxuser

 

[agenkin]

Cheers to everyone

It's funny to see this 5-month old thread resurrected. Since then, I've been shooting only film, and, yes, I got a second hand Durst M700 enlarger and I do my wet printing in the bathroom. I am very happy with the results; my DSLR hasn't been used since February, except for some occasional shots (when I needed a JPEG right away).

You can see some my photographs on Flickr, all of the latest stuff is shot with film cameras. I am quite a happy shooter, and I owe this group a big thank you for that!

 

[kaygee]

Agenkin - have you tried the Kodak Plus-X films? They're my absolute favourite black and white. Of all time. Ever.

Fabulous grain (and if you want MORE grain the 320 is good for that, not overbearing but with enlargement I find it gives me a really nice feel), and absolutely rich blacks and beautiful whites. It's my favourite film. If kodak ever stops making it, I don't know what I'll do.

 

[agenkin]

Agenkin - have you tried the Kodak Plus-X films?

No, I'm on my third 100' spool of Ilford HP5+ now, developing in Ilford DD-X. I've been thinking that I may try another film or developer when this spool runs out. The thing is, I'm quite happy with the HP5+, so I wonder whether it makes sense for me to go off the beaten path.

Thank you for the recommendation. I see that the Plus-X film is ISO 125. How much can you push it? I'm used to pushing HP5+ to 1600 more often than not.

 

[pentaxuser]

Now I know that you have HP5+, try it with Perceptol at EI 250 1:3 at 24 degrees C for 18 mins. Constant agitation for initial 30 secs then 1 or 2 inversions each 30 secs. Very economical and low grain with good sharpness. In reasonable light 250 and f8-11 will allow filters and a reasonable shutter speed.

I managed good shots in an available light old car museum. My thanks to Leon for this combo.

pentaxuser

 

[kaygee]

The thing is, I'm quite happy with the HP5+, so I wonder whether it makes sense for me to go off the beaten path.

I'm always a fan of trying something new, even if you are happy with something. It's a way for me personally anyway to just try something new out of interest, rather than desperation, which usually doesn't work I've found .

To tell you the truth, I haven't experimented too much pushing the Plus-X. You can also get it in 320 ISO, not just 125. That I know for sure.

I'm sure somebody will pipe up soon though with their experience pushing it!

 

[agenkin]

I'm always a fan of trying something new

My fear is that my experimentation with various films/techniques may distract me from experimentation with the more important aspect of photography: taking pictures. Don't take this wrong, though, I do appreciate your suggestions.

 

[audible]

No I say. Always wind it back in. Surest way to ensure you never double expose a film. And get a film retreiver. Doesn't take more than five seconds, which is quicker than I can pop the bottom off.

i just put a little tear in the leader after i remove an exposed roll from the camera. takes only a second and stops me from using the film again.

 

[fschifano]

Okay, a few more questions:

- Why is a stainless steel tank+reel better than plastic, and why does one need "hands of a surgeon" to use it?
- How do the so far recommended D76 and HC-100 of compare with regards to output contrast? I like the dynamic-looking higher contrast, which I am seeing in many film black and whites.

SS tanks are not better than plastic tanks and the reverse is not true either. Each style has drawbacks and advantages. Let's look at the characteristics of each.

• Loading - Here's where plastic has it all over stainless for the newbie. The reels supplied with Paterson and similar tanks are really easy to load provided that they are kept clean and are bone dry. Any trace of moisture will gum up the works and they will jam. SS reels are not self loading and require a bit of finesse. It takes some practice, but it's not hard to do. They can be loaded when wet.
• Durability - I've been using the same set of plastic reels for years and none have worn out. I have some that were hand me downs that have I don't know how much use on them. They are stained and look horrible, but they work just fine. I've dropped them onto a concrete floor form a height of about 1 meter and they are unscathed. Don't try that with a SS reel. It might bend and be almost impossible to straighten enough to be useful again. Drop a plastic tank and you'll probably knock a chip off it. Chances are reasonably good that it won't affect the integrity of the tank, and you can always re-attach the broken bit with a bit of epoxy adhesive. If the tank cracks, you might even be able to seal it up again with more epoxy. I have one very old hand me down tank that's been patched in several places. Works fine. Fixing a SS tank that's bent out of shape? Good luck.
• Cleaning - Both are easy to clean if you don't let any crud build up on them. Rinse either in running water when you're done and they'll stay clean. Let the chemistry build up a "patina" on either style and cleaning is going to be a bitch, though you are less likely to damage a SS reel or tank if you must resort to aggressive cleaning.
• Temperature control - SS conduct heat a lot better than plastic. If you use a tempering bath, you can get one up to temperature in a few minutes. Keeping the tank partially immersed in a tempering bath between agitation cycles will keep things stable. Without a tempering bath, it's easy for the chemistry's temperature to drift. Plastic offers a bit more insulation. It takes a bit longer to get the tank at the desired temperature, but once there it tends to be more stable.
• Agitation - Plastic tanks usually come supplied with a "twirling stick" so you don't need to invert it for agitation. No spills and no leaky tops. SS tanks must be inverted for agitation. I can get messy if you're not careful.
• Fill and Drain Time - Plastic is faster. End of discussion.
• Cost - Plastic is cheaper, a lot cheaper. A good, no-brand plastic tank with two reels sells for less than $20US new. A SS tank sized for two reels is not very expensive, but they come without reels. You can buy cheap SS reels, but they're not worth the carboard box they came in. Hewes brand reels are the best I've seen and a single 35mm reel will sell for upwards of $20 each new. There are others even more expensive that I've not tried.
• Chemistry - SS tanks use a bit less chemistry than equivalent sized plastic tanks. The difference works out to 100ml per reel more or less. It's not a big consideration. The extra volume comes in handy if you like using dilute developers.

As for the developers. I prefer using D-76 over HC-110 any day. It delivers a little more film speed and a little less grain than HC-110. Contrast is more a function of development time, temperature, and agitation with a given developer than it is of developer choice. Since HC-110 is a pretty fast working, active developer, controlling these conditions can be a bit of a challenge. If you want high contrast prints, print your negatives using higher numbered contrast filters or use harder graded paper. By over developing your negatives to a high contrast index, you're destroying the information you worked hard to get with careful exposure. That's bad practice.

 

[srs5694]

• Loading - Here's where plastic has it all over stainless for the newbie. The reels supplied with Paterson and similar tanks are really easy to load provided that they are kept clean and are bone dry. Any trace of moisture will gum up the works and they will jam. SS reels are not self loading and require a bit of finesse. It takes some practice, but it's not hard to do. They can be loaded when wet.

IMHO, this paints a picture that's too negative toward SS reels/too positive toward plastic reels. In my experience, plastic reels occasionally jam and refuse to load. This has happened to me even with reels that have been air dried for days. I suspect, but am not positive, that moisture in the air causes problems on humid days. Of course, when this happens it gets frustrating very quickly, so it really becomes a nightmare. I started with plastic and switched to SS for this reason, and I don't regret the decision. I didn't find it difficult to learn to load SS reels, although maybe I'm just freakish this way or my previous experience with plastic reels eased the learning curve.

• Agitation - Plastic tanks usually come supplied with a "twirling stick" so you don't need to invert it for agitation. No spills and no leaky tops. SS tanks must be inverted for agitation. I can get messy if you're not careful.

OTOH, if you prefer inversion agitation even with plastic tanks, they have a reputation for leaking more than SS tanks do. Of course, there's a lot of variability even within those two categories.

• Fill and Drain Time - Plastic is faster. End of discussion.

Not quite. My own experience is that the difference between a plastic AP tank and a couple of generic SS tanks is pretty small. Although the AP tank is slightly faster, it's not by enough to be important. I've got an admittedly exotic (in the USA) Russian tank that's slower to fill and drain than my SS tanks. It's true that few readers of this forum will rush out and buy a Russian tank, but it is a plastic tank, and so requires modification of your very strong claim.

• Cost - Plastic is cheaper, a lot cheaper. A good, no-brand plastic tank with two reels sells for less than $20US new. A SS tank sized for two reels is not very expensive, but they come without reels. You can buy cheap SS reels, but they're not worth the carboard box they came in. Hewes brand reels are the best I've seen and a single 35mm reel will sell for upwards of $20 each new. There are others even more expensive that I've not tried.

Plastic tanks and reels are less expensive than SS tanks and reels, but not by quite as much as you claim. Looking at prices at Freestyle, an Arista Premium 2-roll plastic tank with reels costs $18.99 and a Jobo 2-roll plastic tank with reels costs $26.99; vs. an Arista SS tank for $14.99 and Hewes 35mm reels for $16.99 ($3 less than the price you claim for 35mm Hewes reels); or a tank with two Hewes reels (and 25 negative storage pages) for $49.99. That makes the total cost of plastic $18.99 to $26.99 and the total cost of SS $49.99. (An SS kit using the cheaper generic reels would cost $23.99, but I agree this would be a false economy.)