What film/developer to push at 1600. I'm looking for a particular style.

[carlostaiwan]

Hi! I would like to start a project, it will be shot in black and white at 1600.
I have these four options in mind (35mm)

• Kentmere 400
• Arista Edu 400
• Tri-x
• Ilford HP5

Developers, I have in mind, ID-11 or Microphen.

I'm not new in film, but always used color. I would love to try to develop by myself, and I'm looking for a slightly high contrast combination, looking also for a old feeling.
My first choice was Tri-x pushed to 1600. Junju Nishimura and Moriyama use this combination, and they are two of my favorite photographers.
Everyone praise HP5 and the results that I see on-line are really good.
Kentmere 400 has a great price and that definitely is important for me. the photos that I see online are all over the place, but mostly good tones, even a bit of high grain.
The idea is to print it 8x10, so I don't know if grain will affect that size

My head is a mess! any idea what combination would be good? Any other suggestion, all ideas are welcomed!

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Contrast is determined by development and not by a film/developer combination unless one goes to a high contrast specialty film. 400TX will give you the finest grain of the films mentioned. Microphen will give a bit more than box speed. Check page 6 to see what Kodak says about push processing this film.

http://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites/prod/files/files/products/f4017_TriX.pdf

 

[mrosenlof]

Delta 3200

 

[markbarendt]

filmconquistador, unless you are shooting a reversal (slide/direct to positive) process, then as Gerald suggests, the specific film and chemicals are actually irrelevant to your question.

Instead it's all about your technique. More than that it's not really even a film development question, although that is a consideration, this is actually a printing question.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

It would be helpful if we knew just what style the OP was wanting to emulate.

 

[Oldwino]

It would be helpful if we knew just what style the OP was wanting to emulate.

I believe he wrote Nishimura and Moriyama.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Delta 3200

+1

 

[Oldwino]

I am interested in this too, as I just bought a 100ft roll of Kentmere 400 to shoot at 1200-1600. I will be using Xtol replenished.

 

[Leigh B]

First question...

Do you really want ASA/ISO 1600 as determined by resolving shadow detail, or
do you just want a printable negative when you underexpose 400 film by 2 stops?

- Leigh

 

[trythis]

I just did a couple of rolls of Hp5 at 1600 in diafine. Very easy to develop, the stuff lasts forever and I think it looks really good for the little effort involved. I havent printed anything, but the shadow detail seems pretty high. Burn and Dodge on an enlarger would give plenty of range.

 

[Oldwino]

I just did a couple of rolls of Hp5 at 1600 in diafine. Very easy to develop, the stuff lasts forever and I think it looks really good for the little effort involved. I havent printed anything, but the shadow detail seems pretty high. Burn and Dodge on an enlarger would give plenty of range.

What's HP5 "officially" rated at in Diafine? 800?

 

[Agulliver]

I have had some lovely, high contrast negatives which both scan and print well pushing HP5+ to 1600 in ID-11 stock and in Microphen. TO be honest I don't see much difference between the two developers and it was very easy to make easily printable negs.

With Kentmere 400, I find that the contrast is reduced when I push to 800, and I have not tried pushing it further. I do believe, however, that it has been done. The negs always seem very dense, as if this film really prefers to be shot at box speed. But other developers may be more successful in this regard?

I haven't tried pushing Fomapan 400 (= Arista Edu 400). I found it barely corresponded to box speed and I don't much like the grain structure. I have shot it at 400 and 320, generally getting best results with lower light conditions.

Tri-X pushes quite well though in ID-11 I have found the grain becomes larger.

 

[Craig75]

i only know provoke era moriyama but if you want to shoot in that style dont shoot delta 3200, and your developer and developer time will be important. Try shooting at 1600 but developing for 3200 time or longer. Dont be afraid to let the highlights wander off in the development as you can burn them back in if you want to give some grainy mid and highlight detail or print straight for higher contrast.

 

[markbarendt]

What's HP5 "officially" rated at in Diafine? 800?

It's not officially rated in Diafine.

The official ISO rating is 400. http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/20106281054152313.pdf That rating doesn't vary, it just is.

What generally varies from user to user (and even shot to shot) is one's personal standard (and wishful thinking) for shadow detail. Physics and chemistry don't bend to our will, we bend to theirs.

The official rating does have some safety factor built in, so most any 400 speed negative film can often be used at 800 very nicely.

There's an old saying "shoot to the shadows and develop for the highlights".

The odds of failed shots (underexposure) is more probable though whenever you reduce exposure below the official rating. "Shooting to the shadows" keeps you from underexposing.

"Develop for the highlights" is, talking about the highlights in the print (on paper you'll hang on the wall) not the film.

Regardless of the rating you use to shoot a shot, you can develop the film for a different rating that you need to print appropriately. To make a good decision about how to adjust development, away from normal, you need to know exactly how you will be printing and I really mean exactly; paper grade and brand, enlarger settings, etc...

Switching developer or development rating can bump a film's sensitivity maybe 1/3 stop, or maybe 1/2. So with HP5 instead of 400, 500-600ish, probably not 800.

One can shoot HP5 at 200 or 800 and process and print, as for 1600, to get the same look as say Nishimura or Moriyama.

 

[removed account4]

It's not officially rated in Diafine.

The official ISO rating is 400. http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/20106281054152313.pdf That rating doesn't vary, it just is.

What generally varies from user to user (and even shot to shot) is one's personal standard (and wishful thinking) for shadow detail. Physics and chemistry don't bend to our will, we bend to theirs.

The official rating does have some safety factor built in, so most any 400 speed negative film can often be used at 800 very nicely.

There's an old saying "shoot to the shadows and develop for the highlights".

The odds of failed shots (underexposure) is more probable though whenever you reduce exposure below the official rating. "Shooting to the shadows" keeps you from underexposing.

"Develop for the highlights" is, talking about the highlights in the print (on paper you'll hang on the wall) not the film.

Regardless of the rating you use to shoot a shot, you can develop the film for a different rating that you need to print appropriately. To make a good decision about how to adjust development, away from normal, you need to know exactly how you will be printing and I really mean exactly; paper grade and brand, enlarger settings, etc...

Switching developer or development rating can bump a film's sensitivity maybe 1/3 stop, or maybe 1/2. So with HP5 instead of 400, 500-600ish, probably not 800.

One can shoot HP5 at 200 or 800 and process and print, as for 1600, to get the same look as say Nishimura or Moriyama.

exactly !

 

[flavio81]

If you want best shadow detail, then Delta 3200, pushed to 1600

If you want fine grain, otherwise, T-Max 400, Delta 400, Tri-X, and HP5, pushed to 1600.

Finest grain possible, is perhaps Ilford XP2 Super pushed in C41 chemicals.

 

[M Carter]

I haven't tested scads of developers, but DD-X has done the best job of getting shadow detail from 3200 and from pushed HP-5+ in my testing. I can get reasonable detail with HP5 at 1200 ISO, that's the farthest I've tested it with DD-X. I really dislike the way 3200 builds the image with that mushy grain, though for lith printing it can sort of link with the process and look pretty good. But to me, 3200 is a film of last resort, when it's too dark for anything else.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Not familiar with the two photographers mentioned. Can anyone provide a typical sample of their style.

 

[carlostaiwan]

Thank you! Everyone was really helpful, it definitely helped

Not familiar with the two photographers mentioned. Can anyone provide a typical sample of their style.

The first one is from Nishimura's Riverside Blues

Second one is Moriyama from the Hokkaido series, not a famous photography, but I really like the color in this one. The ones from the era PROVOKE are amazing, but may too dark and gritty for my taste.
I found out that both of them use Tri-X, developing in SPD, but they put a lot of work in the way they print. In an interview I saw from Nishimura mentions to scan your prints, never scan your negatives.
I will probably go for Tri-x since is cheaper here in Taiwan than HP5, I still haven't decided what developer, Xtol and SPD are quite affordable, I haven't found ilford yet...

 

[markbarendt]

... but they put a lot of work in the way they print ...

That is the 'magic' of their processes. The film developer is, and should be, the least of you worries; any normal developer can do what you want.

Changes to film development are only relevant when trying to print to a specific paper grade. Adams for example liked grade 2 and variable grade papers sucked in his heyday. Adjusting film development was easier that adjusting paper grade.

Today it's easier to use VC paper and change the filter pack.

 

[Craig75]

Ok that Moriyama is easier to do than provoke era. You want a nice grainy negative some very deep blacks and some some moody highlights. the highlights either side of the door by bicycle look like they have been dodged as do highlights in other areas. I suspect you like the colours because they look on the surface natural but could only occur with manipulation in darkroom(I know thats why I like them). You could try something as simple as bracket a shot at 400, 800, 1600 and develop in paper developer which will give you a grainy negative to start with- then choose the one which prints with level of deep shadows you want and then see where you are with highlights. Dont worry about the brand of film.All you want is the cheapest 400 speed film you can get and then choose a grainy developer. Rodinal will grain up a 400 speed film nicely and will make it very sharp, paper developer will also grain things up very well as a high speed negative developer (but possibly less sharp than rodinal - long time since ive used paper developer so I cant remember the sharpness of negatives).

 

[klownshed]

I love HP5+ at 1600 in Microphen.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Thank you for the sample images. They each have a lot to say.

Both prints have higher than normal contrast. While this could be done by extending development of the film it is more probable that it was accomplished during printing. It would be interesting to know if a VC paper was used. That the photographers use extensive manipulation of the print the 'look' has more to do with the skill of the printer than anything else. As starters I would suggest a grainy film like HP5+ exposed and developed normally. Contrast can be added during printing as well as dodging and burning. So no magical film/developer combination but a lot of hard work in the darkroom. The 'trick', if one can call it that. is to make a highly manipulated print not look like a highly manipulated print.

 

[flavio81]

I love HP5+ at 1600 in Microphen.

+1

This worked perfectly with medium format. Sadly i can't get Microphen here anymore.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Very nice photo samples are provided. IMO, first one is very different from second one. For first I would use HP5+ and for second one Kentmere 400 (it is more crappy @1600).