Winter wedding: ISO 1600 film --> Tri-X, Neopan, Delta 3200?

[wordpress]

I will be attending a wedding in March, and I'm planning to shoot some rolls. Now, March is a dark month, so I'm gonna go with ISO 1600 for this one. I usually develop using Microphen and ID-11.

But what film would you suggest? I normally use Neopan 400 and HP5+, but I'm not really a pusher. Never tried Tri-X, but perhaps that would be a choice for this event...? I wish there was some way for me to "read up" on tonality, grain and sharpness. I presume all this films are good, but is there some way for me to predict what kind of result I will get?

For what it's worth: This will be all about "mood", so grain doesn't really concern me. Any input?

 

[MMfoto]

If you REALLY have to shoot it at 1600 than I would suggest the Delta 3200. Tri-x and Neopan 1600 at that speed are both more than a bit gritty. Delta in XTOL (my experience) has a smooth tonality and holds up well at that speed.

Grain wouldn't be my first concern with TX or Neopan 1600, just the very hard shadows of these films pushed.

 

[eddym]

My standard film for shooting ballet performances at 1600 is HP5+ processed in Ilfotec HC. It's contrasty, of course, but grain is not bad at all. For anything faster, I use Delta 3200 in DD-X.

 

[Matt5791]

I shoot a number of weddings (for money!) and I do use Delta 3200 (which I rate at 1600) the only thing I would say is I tend to restrict its use to specific areas where the obvious grain can lend a cetain style and not over do it.

The thing you want to be careful of is too much of it - a whole wedding shot on this film would be, I would go as far as to say, unpleasant - it's just too much and over the top. I would stongly recommend mixing in some 400 speed film aswell as it will look super fine grain along side - if shouldn't be that dark in March, will it?....

Maybe use some flash

 

[johnnywalker]

I just developed some Delta 3200 (exposed at 1600 but developed in ID-11 at 3200 times) of my grandaughter's dance recital (she's 5). They turned out great. I also tried it in DD-X a couple of years ago (same settings) and it also turned out very well.

 

[Pinholemaster]

The Delta 3200 at 1600. The Neopan 1600 I find to be better at 800. And Tri-X, great film, but never got it to work above 1000. My personal shortcoming.

 

[pentaxuser]

Like Matt says, daylight in March shouldn't be that bad. I've taken some great outdoor shots in March with HP5+ at EI 250 developed in Perceptol.

Indoor available light shots may be a different kettle of fish. The options are a change of film from daylight to indoors, a large aperture or flash( especially bounce flash with a suitably powerful gun). If possible, I'd be inclined to visit the site on an overcast day at about the time of the shoot and test exposures at different film speeds minus any film and then use the lowest speed you can get away with.

I recently printed some negs from Kodak 3200 taken about 3 years ago. This was before I knew any better and used to worship the idol of fast film, even when it wasn't necessary. Even at 5x7 the grain was very obvious compared to HP5+ at EI 250 which I finds to be almost grainless at 8x10 full frame and very good even further enlarged and then cropped.

I assume most if not all shots will be people at close range. At weddings prints with grittiness may have much less appeal to the subjects( especially the females) than similar shots of a rock concert.

Might be OK at the reception if it goes on into the wee small hours where
formality and looks are less important than atmosphere.

I think you've chosen the right medium in B&W for a wedding. If you are not the sole photographer there and the pro has chosen colour because the prevailing view is "that's what everyone wants" then be prepared for a pleasant surprise when guests compare your shots to the colour ones.

That was my experience as an amateur at a wedding where the pro shot colour. Less is more.

pentaxuser

 

[Mick Fagan]

As you already have knowledge of Neopan 400, you could look closely at Neopan 1600.

One of the advantages is that you can develop NP400 & NP1600 together.

However NP1600 is really best at 800. It does have high contrast and if the bride has heavy mascara applied around her eyes, then she may start to look a bit ghoulish.

This by the way, is one of the few problems I have with high speed B&W, no matter which film you use.

I have had great success with NP400 & NP1600 in D76 1+1. Which is virtually the same developer as ID11 1+1.

Mick.

 

[htmlguru4242]

The grain and image quality on Delta 3200 at 1600 is good, though I certainly wouldn't call it fine-grained. Works well in D-76 1+1. At 5x7, there will be visible grain, and it can get rather gritty at 8x10. Other than the grain, it looks great.

In my experience, Tri-X looks good @ 1600 as well, and is significantly less grainy than the Delta, but tends to get very contrasty very quickly. This is probably not going to be good in your situation. It works ok in D-76, nicely in TMax Dev. and even better in Microphen.

Neopan 1600 has not worked for me, though I've only used 3 rolls, so i cant really judge yet.

If you're looking for 1600, use the Delta. I'm going to say that you're probably not going to need anything that fast; try using Tri-X rated at 800. Its more than enough speed for most stuff, and comes out really nicely; the grain and contrast are not terribly different from 400.

 

[MMfoto]

Also very important is the fact that Delta 3200 will absolutely give you better under and overexposure latitude than the other options listed. That'd be a big plus for a wedding.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I will be attending a wedding in March, and I'm planning to shoot some rolls. Now, March is a dark month, so I'm gonna go with ISO 1600 for this one. I usually develop using Microphen and ID-11.

But what film would you suggest? I normally use Neopan 400 and HP5+, but I'm not really a pusher. Never tried Tri-X, but perhaps that would be a choice for this event...? I wish there was some way for me to "read up" on tonality, grain and sharpness. I presume all this films are good, but is there some way for me to predict what kind of result I will get?

For what it's worth: This will be all about "mood", so grain doesn't really concern me. Any input?

To be pedantic, you won't get ISO 1600; it doesn't exist in conventional B+W. True ISOs in speed increasing developers: Tri-X and Neopan 400, c. 650, Delta 3200, 1250. EI 1600 is therefore a 1/3 stop push with the Delta 3200, over a 1-stop push (= much more contrast) with the other two. If you have the classic combination of bride in white and groom in black, you are in sertious trouble with the slower films, whereas the long toe on Delta 3200 means you could push still further (maybe 2000) and retain good shadow detail.

Tonally, in my view, there's no contest: Delta 3200 -- IF you (and they) can live with the grain. But a better bet might be to aim for EI 1000, a 1/3 stop push with HP5 with significantly finer grain and still acceptable tonality. Neopan 1600 isn't too bad at 1250, and as the slowest of the three fast films (in descending order, about 1/3 stop apart, Delta 3200, TMZ, Neopan) it's finest grained, but I don't personally like the tonality.

No other ISO 400 film pushes no better than HP5 -- you'll find people telling you that Tri-X does, but then, you'll find others (including me) who say that HP5 pushes best of all -- so it would be unwise in the extreme to switch to another ISO 400 film for an unrepeatable shoot.

On the rare occasions my wife and I have shot weddings (for friends, or as we've grown older, for friends' children) we used mostly ISO 400 (HP5 for me and XP2 for her), plus Delta 3200 when we've needed the speed. Then again, we use fast lenses and RF cameras: most people find they can hand-hold RFs for a shutter-speed-step longer than SLRs.

Hope this helps,

Cheers,

R.

 

[Matt5791]

Interesting point Roger makes about lens speed - What lens(s) are you using? This could make a very significant difference.

As a rule fast primes are the lens type of choice for many wedding photographers.

 

[wordpress]

Thank you all! This is far beyond what I ever would have dreamt of, in terms of good answers.

First of all: Contrast. Yes, I would have to agree that Neopan has a gritty feeling to it. Good for rock concerts, maybe not the best for a feminine bride I'm a bit torn when it comes to contrast. I never took to films like Ilford Delta 100, which others find "smooth like butter". But I don't think Neopan pushed like crazy would be a great idea, either.

Seems like Delta 3200 is something I should try out before using it on such an important occasion. I'll order some rolls and take it from there.

Roger, I have your book!! I like the thought of HP5, pushed. I've learned to appreciate that film, and if it's got an EI of 650 and the Neopan 1600 has an EI of 800 - I think I'll go with HP5, and develope it in Microphen.

I certainly won't be shooting high speed film for the entire occasion, but they're having the wedding party in a very dim, dark hall. It might just end up as a goth wedding...

As for lenses: I will be using a 35mm Summicron-ASPH and my *gorgeous* 50mm M-Hexanon. So, f/2 all around. I might bring my friends 75mm Voigtländer as well, for those head shots.

 

[poutnik]

I have had some wonderful results with HP5+ shot at 1600 and developed in Rodinal (R09) 1+40 (shot in a Pentax 6x7cm with spot metering). Developed for 35mins, 30sec initial agitation, then 1 inversion every 5minutes. I got very nice negatives that do print well on normal grade paper, with just enough shadow detail and nice unobtrusive grain in 24x30 enlargement (or 18x24 cropped at approximately this enlargement size). I'm really really pleased with this combination...

Jiri

 

[marcsv]

I recently tried trix 400 rated at 1600 and developed in acufine. Gave me good contrast, have to do a darkroom print to judge the grain though
Dead Link Removed

 

[Roger Hicks]

Roger, I have your book!! I like the thought of HP5, pushed. I've learned to appreciate that film, and if it's got an EI of 650 and the Neopan 1600 has an EI of 800 - I think I'll go with HP5, and develope it in Microphen.

Thanks for buying the book? Which one? Rangefinder? Or one of the B+W books?

Those speeds are not just EIs: they should be close to the true ISO in Microphen (if anything, HP5 is conservative and may come close to ISO 800), so a small push -- 1/3 to 2/3 stop to EI 1000/1250 -- should be satisfactory, even in poor light, with those lenses. Use all the old tricks such as leaning against a wall and relaxing, pressing the shutter when exhaling, and (if possible) using a very light monopod. If it really is 'Goth' there'll be a lot of black about and you DON'T want hard-pushed film or you'll lose all texture in the clothes -- especially if there's e.g. any white lace -- and black lipstick ain't gonna read that clearly.

Of course, disembodied faces and hands swimming in a black background could be taken as seriously Gothic...

Finally, when in doubt, shoot extra frames at speeds you believe are too long to hand-hold unsupported: 1/15, 1/8, even 1/4. Camera movement/subject movement can add to the mood in the right shot.

Cheers,

R.

 

[MikeSeb]

Another vote for Delta 3200 at EI 1600 in undiluted Xtol or Mytol. Grain will not be obtrusive, just enough to give some visual "tooth" to the image. Good shadow detail, nice creamy tones.

 

[wordpress]

Thanks for buying the book? Which one? Rangefinder? Or one of the B+W books?

Those speeds are not just EIs: they should be close to the true ISO in Microphen (if anything, HP5 is conservative and may come close to ISO 800), so a small push -- 1/3 to 2/3 stop to EI 1000/1250 -- should be satisfactory, even in poor light, with those lenses. Use all the old tricks such as leaning against a wall and relaxing, pressing the shutter when exhaling, and (if possible) using a very light monopod. If it really is 'Goth' there'll be a lot of black about and you DON'T want hard-pushed film or you'll lose all texture in the clothes -- especially if there's e.g. any white lace -- and black lipstick ain't gonna read that clearly.

Of course, disembodied faces and hands swimming in a black background could be taken as seriously Gothic...

Finally, when in doubt, shoot extra frames at speeds you believe are too long to hand-hold unsupported: 1/15, 1/8, even 1/4. Camera movement/subject movement can add to the mood in the right shot.

Cheers,

R.

I have the Rangefinder one, camera porn at its finest... From what you are saying, it seems like HP5 definately is the way to go. I do have a bulk roll of HP5, so there are plenty of room for trying/failing/trying again.

And I ordered a couple of rolls of Delta 3200, just to say how it works.

marcsv: That photo looks very good to me!

 

[ajuk]

I know March is darke, its also spring not winter, but unless its night, you shouldn't need ISO 1600.

For the finest grain, May I suggest XP2 Super Pushed to 1600.

 

[fhovie]

I would use TRI-X and XTOL to push it to 1600. The grain is very fine. You get N+2 contrast, which is needed for most B&W wedding shots. Delta3200 can give you close to N contrast but it is not worth it for the grain. I would have one back with TRI-X at 200 and on back with TRI-X at 1600. The 200 would go in p-cat-p ant the 1600 in XTOL 1:3. 20.5 minutes at 68Deg F. You will get SBR 7 into a DR of 1.25. Perfect for Grade 2 on Condenser heads.

 

[mawz]

ajuk: Actually, the first 3 weeks of March are winter, spring doesn't start officially until March 20 or 21.

I've had excellent results pushing HP5+ in TMax 1:4. even 3200 is surprisingly good. Grainy, but excellent tone.

 

[Black Dog]

I've used Delta in DDX, Celer-Mono, XTOL, Rodinal, Neofin Red and PCAT- all very good, with Celer-Mono probably giving the finest grain. Of course you're using 35mm instead of the MF I normally use, but even the Neofin Red and Rodinal gave less obtrusive grain than I expected with 35mm. HP5 in DDX or Microphen is also good BTW.

 

[Solarize]

If you can get away with 800 ISO I would add my support to pushing Tri-X in X-tol. I have used it for a number of low light portrait sittings and gotten very nice results.

If interested; i diluted it 1+1 and processed at 23 degrees C for 9.5 minutes. Agitated first 30 seconds continuously and then 10 seconds every minute thereafter.

 

[reub2000]

Ultra-high speed film will get you the unique grainy look of a fast film. That is great if that's what your intention is. Otherwise you should use the right tool for the job.

pbase has some samples of the delta 3200 and tmax p3200 films:
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/ilford/delta_3200
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/kodak/tmax_p3200