What influences you to choose a specific film/developer?

[bogeyes]

What is your train of thought when attempting to portray the scene in front of you as a 2d print.Camera choice,film, exposure, composition, contrast, emotion. How do you sort it all out, have you a tried and tested formula in your head? What influences you to choose a certain film/film dev paper/ print dev for a project. I know this is a very ambiguous question but your thoughts would be most appreciated.

 

[ZorkiKat]

Availability

Jay

 

[gnashings]

I think its a thought provoking question. I think there is a overriding degree of "right tool for the job" - but that really just puts you down the right technical path (ie., film speed for lighting conditions). After that is the elusive "look". Take my favourite film/dev combo for example: FP4+ in Rodinal 1+50. Why is it my favourite? Well, yes, its "the look", but what sold me on it is the silliest of things - I liked the way blue jeans came out on the print. So I shot more, and realized that it was just perfect for that slightly vintage, sort of dreamy, memory-like flavour to the images. I soon realized, that the majority of the time, that is the quality that I like in my photos.
After that comes TriX in Acufine - I decided to try it, you know, 5minutes and there you go, 1000ASA according to the box. In retrospect I think its not quite that speed wise under certain lightning conditions - but, I had a couple of rolls under my belt and was blown away with the mellow tones, sharp yet pleasing grain... It looked like the photo essay I always pictured myself makingone day. Still no news on the essay, but I have a soft spot for the combo when the speed is needed.
I suppose with me, once the technical requirements are out of the way its all about the feeling the final images evoke in me. Recently I had the same kind of revelation with Efke100 in Rodinals 1+50 for medium format - the tonality just felt right!
Yep, I will never write a technical text on the subject, and I don't know if this is any help or even if I understood your question correctly - but that is what it is for me!

Peter.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I started using Delta 100 because it was one of the first films I picked up when I first got my Bronica, this then lead to Delta 400 etc. I use Ilfotec HC developer (1+31 and 1+ 63) because it is cheap and reliable, and can generally use up 1 litre of working solution within the recommended keeping time, although I would like to "upgrade" to a sharper developer and am thinking about FX-37 when I start mixing my own chemistry.

I do also like the look of Pan F Plus in Rodinal 1+50, but have shot only a few rolls of this combination because I know what to expect with the Delta films.

 

[Curt]

experience

 

[John Bragg]

With me I guess it is reliability and predictable results that count. Having found a film with characteristics that I like, I will do some practical testing with a range of reliable developers and pick one to suit. Then using this benchmark combo I will get to know it inside out, and only change if forced to by circumstances, such as the withdrawal of one or other of the essential parts from the market. J.B.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I'm with Jay: availability.

Hoving said that, I have to test new films from time to time -- it's part of my job -- and every now and then I find one that really impresses me such as Fomapan 200 (until recently available as Paterson Acupan) or Maco Cube 400.

Sometimes there are accidents, too, like the time I was loaned an Alpa in Zuerich and the only film that was available was HP5 Plus, which I hadn't used since pre-Plus days.

A lot is down to the accident of how well it behaves in the developers I try, too. For example I dislike Fuji Acros, because I've found it very picky about developers and development regimes; if I can get results I prefer, easier, with another film, I'll obviously do so. But I don't think Acros is a bad film for everyone -- just for me.

As a result, I tend to try to make sure that the thilms I like are the ones that are available to me... The criterion I use is tonality.

Cheers,

Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com)

 

[Steve Smith]

My choice is usually dictated by what I've got at the time. I'm trying to get a bit more organised though.

Steve.

 

[noseoil]

I took a little time off of work yesterday morning to attend a memorial service at a park here in town. I knew it would be a hand-held event, so I took my old 35mm Fujica with 135mm f2.8 lens, tri-x and planned on PMK as the developer. Tri-x for speed, 35mm for quick handling, internal meter, ease of use and PMK because I like what it does with grain and tonality. The problem was, it was in full shade (90% of the shots). I had to decide about development. Used 20% more time than usual in the developer. Still have to print, although the few shots in full sun may be blown due to highlights, the shots in shade should look very nice.

The service was for a K9 dog from the Tucson Police department. He was chasing a car-jacking suspect at the end of last month, when the suspect jumped off of an overpass and he followed. The suspect landed in a small tree, the dog fell 30 feet onto the road below. His handler had to drive him to a vet at 1:00 in the morning, where x-rays showed a severed spine and broken bones, no chance for survival. "Miko" was a shepherd from the Czech Republic who was loved by his partner. These dogs go home after working and live as a family pet at the officer's house. It was a nice memorial service and a small "Dog Park" will be named to honor his service to the community. R.I.P. Miko. tim

 

[reellis67]

For me, it has a lot to do with experience. I know what I can get from the films and developers that I use, just as I know what my various cameras and lenses will give me. When I do serious work, I think about how I want the final print to look, and I don't trip the shutter until I have that fixed in my mind (unless I am experimenting). Then, based on that final print concept, I choose what equipment, film, filter, agitation method, paper, developers, and toner(s) I will need to use in order to get where I want to be.

It doesn't always work out the way I wanted: sometimes I see things later in other images that I did not see when I exposed the negative, and sometimes I don't get what I wanted from some shots, but that is to be expected. I learn from the results I get and try to use that knowledge to make finer and finer adjustments in both my vision and my technique.

Photography is an unending learning process that cannot be rushed. I find that I learn the most when I relax and just let it come. If I try to assimilate something to soon or try to force the process, all learning stops and everything goes to hell. This usually happens when someone is trying to push some new idea on me, which is why I almost always take pictures alone. I prefer to read about all sorts of different technique and concepts and then when I get to a point that they feel right to me, that I what to learn them, then I go back and read more about the specifics and it clicks right in.

Another thing that helped me get to the point where I am is ignoring much of the equipment, film, developer, and technique banter until I had a reason to change what I was doing. I chose to use Ilford films (PanF, FP4+, and HP5+) only and use Rodinal and Perceptol as my developers because I liked the results I get with those combinations. Admittedly, I used a fair number of films and developers in the very beginning because I had no experience at all with any of them. I had shot Kodachrome for 20+ years and when I started black and white I knew absolutely nothing about different films. I chose Ilford because other people seemed to use these films often, they were locally available, and there were three speed from the same manufacturer.

As for developer, at first I chose Rodinal for one reason only, longevity. I have since tried other developers, but I find that I love the results of Rodinal and now the longevity is just icing on the cake. I chose Perceptol because I read Barry Thornton's book and thought it would be just as good a choice as any to start with and I've never had any specific reason to change so I still use it. It can be diluted or used straight for different effects and it works well.

In the end, only you can justify why you do, or don't do, any given thing. To understand what can and can't be done, on your own experience can really give you the answers you are looking for. The comments of others can be invaluable for guidance, but in the end, there is no substitute for your own personal experience...

- Randy

 

[Wigwam Jones]

Price. Occasionally, intended use.

 

[Steve Roberts]

Mainly the predictability and availability of all materials involved. No point finding a film that's wonderful some of the time but only when you can find it. Personally, I think you have to go a long way to beat Ilford's range of film and chemicals and ultimately IMHO it's how you point the camera that makes the biggest difference between a good print and a great one, not a slight tendency to appear grainy in the mid grey tones.

Steve

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I pick the film and developer based on what it will do for me. If it gives the look I want, and it gives the performance I need, that's what I choose. Were I still silver printing as much, I'd probably stick more to metol-based developers, but I'm doing a lot of alt-process work where I need something that works with UV-rich light sources. I use primarily FP4+ as a film because it is easy to control the contrast, and I use Pyrocat HD because the stain with Pyrocat is very effective for blocking UV light, and it gives me at least a half-stop if not a full stop more film speed.

 

[pgomena]

Ditto Flying Camera, I pick film and developer based on what they will do for me. After years of battling HC-110 and TMX as a combination for general landscape work, I switched to Delta 100 and PMK. I needed a film/developer combo that would give me a big "safety net" in capturing highlight and shadow detail in very contrasty backlit scenes. Bingo. I found Delta 100 a bit more forgiving in processing, and PMK helps hang on to highlight detail like a big catcher's mitt. Just what I needed to do the job. I find, however, that Delta 100 doesn't work perfectly for me in all situations. Still on the hunt for the ideal second film/developer combo. IT may be Delta 100 or FP4+ or APX 100 in Pyrocat HD, or maybe . . .

Peter Gomena

 

[Saganich]

There are alot of variables and it is best to nail as many down as possible, as many of the others have indicated. I'm pretty new at all of this myself, only managing my own self-tought B&W processing for about 4 years now, still trying different combinations of flm and developers, although less aggressivly then befor. My two main films are TriX and FP4. Why? I like how they look when I expose them well. No other reason. Chemistry can be a tail chasing experience. The combinations I like are TriX and FP4 in HC110 very diluted with light agitation. I get an aggressive negative that prints well. I also like TriX and FP4 in Pyro and Pyrocat but find the staining developers to be like animals that need full time attention. Rodinol is a given; a great developer which I will try with FP4 after reading the previous post! It looks great with the EFKE films.
Chris
www.imagebrooklyn.com

 

[Markok765]

The beauty of a backlit portrait made during a sunset with tmax 100 and rodinal stand dev.

 

[John Bartley]

R.I.P. Miko. tim

A real hero - their loyalty and devotion knows no boundaries.

 

[John Bartley]

Ease of use - price - availability - simplicity - all the things that make my life easier because when I get home from work and play at my hobbies, I want them to be relaxing and fun.

 

[Ole]

Experience, and the joy of experimentation coupled with a smidgeon of luck.

Like shooting a partial solar eclipse on 9x12cm APX100, six exposures through an IR filter on a single sheet of film, with a 360mm Tele-Xenar. I had absolutely no previous experience with that situation, nor of any developer that could give usable results. The end result was 90% luck.

 

[gnashings]

A real hero - their loyalty and devotion knows no boundaries.

Amen

 

[Lee Shively]

My freezer is full of experience.

 

[battra92]

What is your train of thought when attempting to portray the scene in front of you as a 2d print.Camera choice,film, exposure, composition, contrast, emotion. How do you sort it all out, have you a tried and tested formula in your head? What influences you to choose a certain film/film dev paper/ print dev for a project. I know this is a very ambiguous question but your thoughts would be most appreciated.

Well first off, I have to ask myself a few questions:

If it's something that's available light, how sunny is it? Should I take 100 or 400? I'm not a huge stickler on grain of 400 (especially with MF) but I almost never use anything faster. I also only use my Efke 25 and 50 when it's super bringht and sunny out and there's nothing Red.

After that, when I have my speed decided on, I use HC-110 for the fast stuff and Foma R09 for the slow stuff. Why? Because I prefer liquid concentrate developers and those have reputations for working well with specific speeds.

 

[nworth]

Mostly, I use a combination that is familiar to me. If I am using a film that is unfamiliar, I try to use a developer that I know. My starting point is often the manufacturer's recommendation. This may be uninspiring, but it is likely to work. Sometimes I will venture forward with something else just out of curiosity. That's how I found Rodinol and Pyrocat-HD (both worthwhile). If I can experiment with non-critical negatives (usually), I may try a developer or film because someone has recommended it for a particular effect. Sometimes that works out. But the best results seem to come from making a familiar combination a routine. There is a lot of unmeasured craft in developing, and you unconsciously tune things as much as you consciously try for the right combination and technique. This implies that you can lose the skill as well, and I can testify that that does happen if you do not work often and consistently with your chosen combinations.

 

[Black Dog]

Tonality that's good enough to eat, but sometimes I feel the need........the need for speed. However I do use XP2 a lot because of the fine grain and tonality and then I don't have the developer choice problem

 

[Willie Jan]

for weddings i use a 400 film (fuji neopan 400) (medium format) because a 100 is mostly to slow. for nature at 4x5 i want a film that shows leaves in stead of dark areas (fuji across). For nature in color i use slides because i want the colors to be near the reality (fuji velvia 100, a bit more saturated than reality).

The more different films you use, the less experience you will have because it takes time to learn a film.
besides that the camera lens/developer/your method/enlarger/lens/paper also influences your picture....