What film i should try next?

[ramon_63]

Hello, after 2 years i came back to film photography, so i decided to scan all my negatives taken from 2018/2020 and after that search for some new rolls of film to try it. Then i reviewed all the scans to realize what b&w film was more of my liking.
The results in order are Adox Silvermax - Kodak TMax 400 - Ilford Pan 400 - Kodak Tri X 400 - Ilford Pan 100 - Kentmere 100. I think that normally i prefer film with high contrast and that can reproduce fine detail.
Actually i have a 3/4 bottle of rodinal, but also a bag of D76 that expired in may, but i think that it fine to use it, so if i develop film i will use these developers. I have 2 remaining rolls of Ilford Pan 400 and 5 rolls of Kentmere 100 but i want to try new options.
What film do you recommend to try it?

In My country i have available these options:
All Foma films
All Lomography Films
Adox CMS 20 II
Ilford Delta 100/400/3200, XP2 400, HP5 400, FP4 125,ORTHO PLUS, PAN F PLUS 50.
Kodak TriX, Tmax 100/400.
EASTMAN DOUBLE-X 5222
AGFA APX 100/400.

I attach 1 photo per roll scanned that i like from. So every image its from a new roll but sometimes its the same film.

 

[Huub]

Pan F in combination with Rodinal is a pretty contrasty combination that resolves very fine detail. Over-expose slightly to give enough shadow detail. Pan F doesn't keep the latent image very well and needs to be developed shortly after exposure.

But also: contrast is a function of development time and when you want more contrasty negatives increasing the time by 25% will do a good job in most cases.

 

[koraks]

What film do you recommend to try it?

Just stick with one film for a while and learn how it works.
Sounds like currently you're going through film the way a wine lover goes through bottles of wine, expecting that the enjoyment of the result is entirely defined by what the maker put into the product. That's not how photography works and it's not how film works. Try to see film more like wheat flour. Nearly any kind of flour can make a gorgeous bread (or a horrible brick you wouldn't want to feed to a dog), but it's the baker who knows how to process it into something delicious, in full awareness of the properties/strengths and weaknesses of the flour.

If you keep tossing random rolls of film into a development tank and then determine how you like the outcome on your computer monitor, you're selling yourself short and deprive yourself of the most important things that make film photography worthwhile: the possibility to tailor results by using a raw material in a sensible way.

So concerning your question what film you should try next, I would say: one you already used before. And after that, the same film. And then the same one once more. And so on until you understand how it works.

 

[Neal]

All good choices and you can make good photographs with any of them. Try to avoid assuming that the results of any specific roll is representative of all the photos that the given film/developer combination will provide. Just have fun with it.

 

[foc]

but it's the baker who knows how to process it into something delicious, in full awareness of the properties/strengths and weaknesses of the flour.

To use another analogy, better to cook one recipe a hundred times than to cook one hundred recipes once.

 

[koraks]

@foc I like that one, and it's very true as well!

 

[pentaxuser]

To use another analogy, better to cook one recipe a hundred times than to cook one hundred recipes once.

Yes that was always my philosophy as a bachelor. Whatever happened to the missing "t"?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

If you want high contrast film with lots of detail, try Ilford Pan F. I quite like it in D-23 1+3. But if you want a really high contrast film with the most detail, check out Adox CMS 20 II. I've been using it in 4x5 developing with Adotech IV, although I've been hunting for a made at home alternative.

 

[Bill Burk]

Double-X 5222 is worth an experiment. I consider it to have “beautiful” grain. Not all film has that. I have had a little trouble “dialing it in” so “look at results and adjust time and exposure”.

HP5+ also has nice grain, tolerates overexposure and hit the expected contrast for me on the first try. So I would say it’s a really good choice.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Your scans looks like severe over sharpening or something.
It looks ruined, sorry.

Also, if you scan it is easy to get any amount of contrast in PP.
All the real difference is fast or slow film. Summer time - go crazy and try ISO 25, winter time - push 400 @1600.

But you really need to sort out quality loss first.

This is crapiest film I have tried "new" TMAX3200 @6400. Plustek 8200i scan:

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

HP5 has been my main film for years. Pretty hard to beat!

 

[jtk]

IMO it'd be better to use one kind of film for a long time ...until you're happy with results....variety of films has not helped the vanishing market for film.

 

[Paul Howell]

Tmax 100 resolves at 200LPMM, highest resolution of any general purpose black and white film, and the finest grain. You can adjust the contrast by increasing the development time, I've used it with good results in Rodinal, D76, HC110, MCM 100 to name just a few.

 

[Sirius Glass]

1. Reshoot those films and develop in XTOL for finer grain and better tonality.
2. Rollei IR 400 with a R25, R29 or R72 [720] filter and develop in XTOL for some great IR photographs.

 

[pentaxuser]

ramon 63, I'd try as many as you can find and afford to buy which I think is what you want to do and what you want answers about. Each of us can and will give you, our favourites and in some cases, reasons why but at the end of the day each of us is different including you.

Stick with one film and learn all there is about it is also good advice but I don't think this advice really covers what you want.

pentaxuser

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

IMO it'd be better to use one kind of film for a long time ...until you're happy with results....variety of films has not helped the vanishing market for film.

That is advice that all should take when starting out. Sadly, it takes many to realise that after they've muddled around for a few years...

 

[ramon_63]

Pan F in combination with Rodinal is a pretty contrasty combination that resolves very fine detail. Over-expose slightly to give enough shadow detail. Pan F doesn't keep the latent image very well and needs to be developed shortly after exposure.

But also: contrast is a function of development time and when you want more contrasty negatives increasing the time by 25% will do a good job in most cases.

If you want high contrast film with lots of detail, try Ilford Pan F. I quite like it in D-23 1+3. But if you want a really high contrast film with the most detail, check out Adox CMS 20 II. I've been using it in 4x5 developing with Adotech IV, although I've been hunting for a made at home alternative.

Pan F sounds interesting, i have heard the problem about short image latency, thanks for the advice. Adox CMS 20 II will be a nice thing to try with that lower sensitivity.

Double-X 5222 is worth an experiment. I consider it to have “beautiful” grain. Not all film has that. I have had a little trouble “dialing it in” so “look at results and adjust time and exposure”.

HP5+ also has nice grain, tolerates overexposure and hit the expected contrast for me on the first try. So I would say it’s a really good choice.

HP5 has been my main film for years. Pretty hard to beat!

HP5 was recommended by my old film teacher, and Double X 5222 maybe a fun experiment, really never heard about that film before checking what film are available online in my country.

1. Reshoot those films and develop in XTOL for finer grain and better tonality.
2. Rollei IR 400 with a R25, R29 or R72 [720] filter and develop in XTOL for some great IR photographs.

I have to search if i can buy xtol in my country, i think that its hard to find a store with stock.

Tmax 100 resolves at 200LPMM, highest resolution of any general purpose black and white film, and the finest grain. You can adjust the contrast by increasing the development time, I've used it with good results in Rodinal, D76, HC110, MCM 100 to name just a few.

I have shoot Tmax 400 and liked the results, if Tmax 100 is similar will be a good choice.

 

[ramon_63]

Your scans looks like severe over sharpening or something.
It looks ruined, sorry.

Also, if you scan it is easy to get any amount of contrast in PP.
All the real difference is fast or slow film. Summer time - go crazy and try ISO 25, winter time - push 400 @1600.

But you really need to sort out quality loss first.

This is crapiest film I have tried "new" TMAX3200 @6400. Plustek 8200i scan:

I think that was a problem with Lightroom export and sharpening for screens something like that was activated and in high setting. The scans looks OK to me in my screen, but in my city there is only one scaning lab so i have no other choice, they use a Noritsu LS 1200 i think.

 

[ramon_63]

I understand that its better to try a film and shoot a lot of rolls to know that film and create good results but i have to explain a little of my country situation. My actual stock of film, chemicals and paper dated 3/4 years ago when the prices were low in my country.
Actually my country has closed all non essential imports, this include film, chemicals, and so on. And our country have like 60/80% annually inflation rate so prices ever increases, just now in one month our currency devaluated 70% compared to US dollar and if i have to buy something its now or never , in 2/3 month will be no stock of anything.
And if as if this were not enough i think that prices of film are expensive here compared to the world, but right now after our devaluation in dollars, the prices are cheaper but its temporary they will increase a lot in days. For example now a roll of Pan F its 5.8 dollars, Fomapan 100 3 dollars, Adox CHS 20 II 5 dollars.
For all that reasons i want to buy some new films, paper and chemicals, and if i have the money a bulk roll.
I have like 4 rolls of Kentmere 100, and an entire bulk roll to load. And i shoot like one and a half entire bulk rolls of Ilford pan 400 and i have 2 or 3 rolls remaining, but i have this because when i bought it was a situation just like now, films was cheaper and i have to take advantage of the situation buying a lot to have stock.
Also i really like to do prints, scan film its for social media and review without doing a contact sheet, because paper here its more scarce than film and expensive compared to the rest of the world. I think i have like 6 24x30.5 sheets of multigrade RC paper remaining and buy the same 10 package now its like 36 dollars.
I hope that after this explanations you can understand why i want to try a new film before it is too late. And with that purchase i should be able to enjoy film photography for 2/3 years . I really want to live in a place where i can buy film, paper chemicals, lots of options but for now i am stuck in my country with a few options available. For the record if i try to buy anything from outside my country and ship it to my country, i will have to pay 125% of taxes, and expect 2 months for customs clearance if i have luck. And you can only receive 5 packages per year.

 

[koraks]

I understand the difficult situation you are in regarding availability.

For example now a roll of Pan F its 5.8 dollars, Fomapan 100 3 dollars, Adox CHS 20 II 5 dollars.

That's a lot cheaper than here in Western Europe, indeed. I can see the sense in stocking up because those prices look very close to or even lower than wholesale/import prices. Unsustainably low, in any case.

I hope that after this explanations you can understand why i want to try a new film before it is too late.

Yes and no. Yes in the sense that I see why you want to stock up on film while you still can. No, I don't understand the very open question what film to try next, if the actual problem is one of uncertain supply. In the latter case, it would make more sense to first determine which films are available and affordable to you, and then choose from that. This will probably narrow down the selection considerably and result in a more direct comparison of maybe a handful of film types.

And of course, in general, if you're practicing a hobby and you cannot afford to spend all you have on it, you sometimes just have to work with what you can get your hands on. Taking it from that angle, find comfort in my previous post: even if the film you can easily/affordably get does not immediately look like what you were hoping for, you can still learn to bake a very nice bread with it.

In the end, in your situation I would expect more a question along the lines of: given that I can only get Fomapan 100 (to take an example), how can I use it in such a way to give high-contrast images with visible grain (again, an example)?

 

[jtk]

I understand the difficult situation you are in regarding availability.




That's a lot cheaper than here in Western Europe, indeed. I can see the sense in stocking up because those prices look very close to or even lower than wholesale/import prices. Unsustainably low, in any case.




Yes and no. Yes in the sense that I see why you want to stock up on film while you still can. No, I don't understand the very open question what film to try next, if the actual problem is one of uncertain supply. In the latter case, it would make more sense to first determine which films are available and affordable to you, and then choose from that. This will probably narrow down the selection considerably and result in a more direct comparison of maybe a handful of film types.

And of course, in general, if you're practicing a hobby and you cannot afford to spend all you have on it, you sometimes just have to work with what you can get your hands on. Taking it from that angle, find comfort in my previous post: even if the film you can easily/affordably get does not immediately look like what you were hoping for, you can still learn to bake a very nice bread with it.

In the end, in your situation I would expect more a question along the lines of: given that I can only get Fomapan 100 (to take an example), how can I use it in such a way to give high-contrast images with visible grain (again, an example)?

I think Koraks has provided very good advice.

Also, it might be useful to think more about developers than about B&W film. IMO Rodinal is capable of exquisite results with all sorts of films, particularly with highly diluted stand processing (which makes time, temp, and film-type non-critical).

 

[markjwyatt]

You cannot get ADOX CHS 100 II? I am taking a liking to it. I liked the Silvermax a lot also, but it is not available in the US, and whatever is left in Europe will be the last of it. I do have some expired 120 Agfapan APX 100, which is basically what Silvermax is. What is available to you is Agfaphoto APX 100, which is not "real" Agfa film (it is made by Harman, and probably as good or near as good as Kentmere, but it is not Agfa).

Lomography Potsdam and Berlin are actually Orwo films, and may be worth trying (they also derive from Agfa trapped in East Germany after the war).

 

[mshchem]

I would buy a bulk roll of HP5 . You can make smaller 18 or 20 exposure rolls. Prices doubling, that's tough.

 

[albireo]

Just stick with one film for a while and learn how it works.
Sounds like currently you're going through film the way a wine lover goes through bottles of wine, expecting that the enjoyment of the result is entirely defined by what the maker put into the product. That's not how photography works and it's not how film works. Try to see film more like wheat flour. Nearly any kind of flour can make a gorgeous bread (or a horrible brick you wouldn't want to feed to a dog), but it's the baker who knows how to process it into something delicious, in full awareness of the properties/strengths and weaknesses of the flour.

If you keep tossing random rolls of film into a development tank and then determine how you like the outcome on your computer monitor, you're selling yourself short and deprive yourself of the most important things that make film photography worthwhile: the possibility to tailor results by using a raw material in a sensible way.

So concerning your question what film you should try next, I would say: one you already used before. And after that, the same film. And then the same one once more. And so on until you understand how it works.

Beautifully put, agree entirely

 

[grat]

IMO it'd be better to use one kind of film for a long time ...until you're happy with results....variety of films has not helped the vanishing market for film.

And then you discover you've been wasting your time with a film that you just don't like in order to get results that are still just not what you want.

I agree that it's worth focusing on a particular film stock, but you shouldn't ignore the other options.