Black & White Film Suggestions?

Noah_

Noah_

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,038
Name
Ashly
Edit My Images
No
I've recently been interested in trying out some new {black & white} 35mm film however I'm not aware of all the benefits/drawbacks of various films that I've been looking into here & I wondered if anyone wouldn't mind advising me or even recommending films for me to experiment with? I tend to shoot in natural light & am looking for a film with a low ISO to produce sharper photographs than the ones I'm currently producing with 400ISO & a slightly slower speed film will allow me to compensate for the wide apertures I tend to shoot with.

Films I've been looking at are the Ilford Delta 100 Professional & Ilford FP4 Plus at 125ISO. Anyone had any experiences with these films or perhaps some recommendations to offer me? Just curious to broaden my knowledge & experiments rather than continuously shooting with the same film. I'm not specifically interested in Ilford I've just only ever shot black & white using Ilford before. Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
I spent so long researching every last review of the various black and white films, spending hours finding every review on places like here, APUG, photo.net and anywhere else you care to think of.

Realised sod it, just bought a few emulsions and found the one I like (the one I bang on about in these fora, Kodak T-Max).

Agfa APX100 developed in Rodinal is known for its high actuance, so that would fit the "sharper photographs" category. And APX100 is under £3 from Silverprint. I wouldn't write off ISO400 film though, film technology really is very very advance now and most ISO400 emulsions will offer a lot - T-Max 400 offers ISO100 grain, for instance.

Delta will look quite different to FP4+ - they have two different grain types (t-grain for the former).
 
Film choices are very subjective, personally i think all Ilford films other than PanF are boring and the only thing i use HP5 for is shooting at ISO 1600 because it pushes quite well and costs 1/2 the price of Delta 3200. For sharp low speed films, i would reccomend Ilford PanF ISO50 and Adox CHS ISO 25. If they are too slow, maybe try Agfa APX-100 or Fuji Acros 100. Acros is a lovely film, nice and smooth with good tones. Works very well stand developed in Rodinal.

If you develop your own film and are considering doing slower films, ie up to ISO 200, then i would get hold of a bottle of Rodinal, costs about £10 and lasts for months/years. It enhances the sharpness of the film but increases grain slightly, hence why you should only use it for slow films.

If you search on Flickr for different film types, you will see some which you might take a liking to.

Everyone has their own favourites, so best thing to do is pick up a roll of each and try some of them out :)
 
@Freecom2 Definitely not going to stop using my current favourite 400ISO film, I'm just curious about other options out there that're slightly slower. I'd be interested in trying a range of different films tho so thank you for your suggestions, I'll look into them further.
 
Last edited:
Don't forget acros :) my go-to medium speed b&w film, although I'm going to buy some fp4 soon and see what the fuss is all about, loads of people seem to love the stuff!

Freecom's right though, grab a few and test them for yourself,it's the best way by far but I know what you mean with recommendations, nice to narrow down your options sometimes.
 
IamAshlyRose said:
@Freecom2 Definitely not going to stop using my current favourite 400ISO film, I'm just curious about other options out there that're slightly slower.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, is that HP5? Like Rob, I never really liked it when I tried it in 35mm, although I have a 120 roll of it that I plan on shooting when I get the chance. I struggle to shoot anything <ISO400, I like the flexibility, although I can understand the need for creative depth of field applications.
 
@robhooley167 Those are good suggestions. I do dev my own film so Rodinal might be a worthwhile investment & I have been reading into stand development lately tho I'm yet to give it a go myself. Would you recommend trying Ilford PanF 50ISO? I'm thinking of purchasing a couple of a range of films to try out & just thought it's be worth posting in here to hear about various experiences & I'm thinking Acros 100 might be one of those! Looking on Flickr is a decent suggestion, how did I not think of that? Thank you.
 
APX is a lovely film, very punchy and sharp. Grain is quite large but it's the nice looking kind, you'd never want to get rid of it even when pushed to 400. (It'll push to 800 fairly well too). Really easy to handle too, no reel hassle and dries straight!

Best for me has always been XP2 though, the tonal range of that film is totally without equal, I would imagine it's pant wetting good in Medium Format! So smooth and creamy yet contrasty, sharp and well defined at the same time!
 
@MahoneyD187 Thank you for the suggestion :} I'm having a little trouble catching up with all these speedy answers!

I've heard pretty decent things about Ilford FP4 aswell & it'll be one that I'll definitely have to experiment with. Yeah I felt a little overwhelmed with all the options out there & I've had amazing advice from posting in this forum before so I thought it'd be worth a shot to be directed along the right path :}
 
Last edited:
PanF with a yellow filter is absolutely gorgeous, it's the only ilford film i really get on with. Don't discount Adox 25, it has quite a tight exposure latitude but if you nail it then it gives nearly grainless negatives.
I shoot these in medium format and have to use a tripod due to the size and weight of the camera, as a result the film speed doesn't really matter and i always use slower films to squeeze extra detail out of the negatives
My slow film reccomendations :
Adox CHS25
Ilford PanF+
Fuji Acros 100
 
@freecom2 Yeah that'd be HP5. I studied traditional black & white photography at college & thats the film all students were recommended to use for assignments. I finished college last summer & I've carried on shooting film since leaving but I've only just decided I want to try out shooting new films. I'm obviously not quite satisfied with my work on HP5 at the moment ~ time to branch out :}!
 
@Alan Clogwyn Thank you for the suggestions. Looks like I'll be adding XP2 to my list to research/experiment with!

Best for me has always been XP2 though, the tonal range of that film is totally without equal, I would imagine it's pant wetting good in Medium Format! So smooth and creamy yet contrasty, sharp and well defined at the same time!
Click to expand...
 
I've tried most films over the years and have always come back to Tri-X for general shooting.

I do like Pan F for slower stuff although I recently tried a roll of Rollei Retro 80S which has remarkably fine grain and an extended red range which gives you the effect of using an orange filter with darkened skies and white fluffy clouds. The downside is that the emulsion base is bloody horrible, curls like Bonnie Langford's hair and has to be loaded in dim light (in 120 size, not sure about 35mm) as the acetate base can transmit light from the edges into the frames.

Choice of developer is probably more important than the film although once you have found a good combination it's worth sticking to it and discovering all that it can offer.
 
@robhooley167 Might pick up a few Ilford PanF. Looks like I have a few different films to be experimenting with over the Spring & Summer :} thank you.
 
Can only echo whats been said - Pan F is lovely and fine-grained. I like HP5 pushed a stop or two for street shooting. I've got on with Fuji Neopan 400 too.

Worth noting that XP2 is a C41 process film - so there would be little control over development and no wet printing.
 
EdBray said:
Choice of developer is probably more important than the film although once you have found a good combination it's worth sticking to it and discovering all that it can offer.
Click to expand...

Thank you, that's valuable advice. I'm currently working with Ilford DDX developer but a few in a range of different threads have recommended Rodinal.
 
Thmaga said:
Can only echo whats been said - Pan F is lovely and fine-grained. I like HP5 pushed a stop or two for street shooting. I've got on with Fuji Neopan 400 too.

Worth noting that XP2 is a C41 process film - so there would be little control over development and no wet printing.
Click to expand...

Can you expand on what you mean by that statement please?
 
You cant develop XP-2 in normal B&W chems, but you can wet print it, takes a little while longer due to the dense base but it can be done :)
 
Thmaga said:
I thought XP2 was strictly C41 chems only?
Click to expand...

Officially it is but I and many others have developed it in normal B&W developers like ID11 and D76.

It was more your other statement about wet printing that I would have liked you to have expanded upon.
 
robhooley167 said:
You cant develop XP-2 in normal B&W chems, but you can wet print it, takes a little while longer due to the dense base but it can be done :)
Click to expand...

Both parts of this statement are incorrect. :thumbsdown:

You can develop XP2 in normal B&W chemicals.

There is also little if any difference in printing a XP2 negative that has been correctly exposed than any other Black and White film as regards printing times.

The really great thing about XP2 is that if you overexpose it from it's nominal ISO400 you get finer grain (well actually its a dye but it is finer). Xp2 has a very great exposure latitude which means it can be shot at anything from ISO50 to ISO1600 on the same roll. That makes it versatile, but where it comes into it's own is when it is correctly exposed at ISO400 you get a fantastic dynamic range as the film will cope with pretty much any tone that you throw at it.
 
Have to agree with @Alan Clogwyn, XP2 produces beautiful photographs, developed via both Caffenol & C41 ~ is it one I should attempt to process at home? If not, Is it worth trying despite C41 processing? They do look wonderful. I'll be scanning the negatives in a little while 'til I've found an appropriate & affordable darkroom in which to wet print. Are they much denser?
 
Last edited:
EdBray said:
Both parts of this statement are incorrect. :thumbsdown:

You can develop XP2 in normal B&W chemicals.
Click to expand...

I should have elaborated more but this thread is going off topic. It's not made to be devved in normal B&W chems but it can with inconsistent results. I found printing times to be longer due to the base acting like a red-orange multigrade filter :shrug:
 
Are you sure that your not thinking of Kodak BW400CN as thats the only one of the three C-41 B&W films to have an orange mask like conventional colour neg film.

XP2 Super has a clear base deliberately to make it easy to print on B&W paper whilst the BW400CN on the other hand has the orange mask to make it so that it prints fine optically on RA-4 colour paper.
 
Possibly, was told by the guy whose negs they were that it was XP2 and i had no reason to not believe him as i tend to steer clear of C-41 Black and white films :shrug:
 
Last edited:
IamAshlyRose said:
Have to agree with @Alan Clogwyn, XP2 produces beautiful photographs, developed via both Caffenol & C41 ~ is it one I should attempt to process at home? If not, Is it worth trying despite C41 processing? They do look wonderful. I'll be scanning the negatives in a little while 'til I've found an appropriate & affordable darkroom in which to wet print. Are they much denser?
Click to expand...

Definitely worth trying, though you'll need to experiment to find your times in whatever chemicals you use.

s162216 said:
Are you sure that your not thinking of Kodak BW400CN as thats the only one of the three C-41 B&W films to have an orange mask like conventional colour neg film.

XP2 Super has a clear base deliberately to make it easy to print on B&W paper whilst the BW400CN on the other hand has the orange mask to make it so that it prints fine optically on RA-4 colour paper.
Click to expand...

Sorry to disappoint but XP2 has a purple mask!
 
I was given a pack of Kodak T-max 100, and that has a very smooth fine grain (in fact its an absolute sod of find with a grain enlarger when wet printing, I usually just look for contrasty edges to focus on now).
 
I have settled on acros for 100 and HP5+ for 400+. Just trying to find a decent developer for the HP5+ now. Problem is it takes me a lot of time to use up developer!

Tried a few others but didn't like T-max 100/400, TRI-X or neopan 1600 when I tried them. Have some of the Agfa to process now (in rodinal) and used to use legacy pro 100 (nice negatives but curled in 2 different planes!) but like my 2 current films. This is 35mm only at present.
 
Give D76 a go with hp5 jim, grain isn't obtrusive and it's got a nice tonality. At £1.76 or whatever it is you can't go wrong, at 1:1 it'll do 4 films if you one shot it
 
Mahoneyd187 said:
Give D76 a go with hp5 jim, grain isn't obtrusive and it's got a nice tonality. At £1.76 or whatever it is you can't go wrong, at 1:1 it'll do 4 films if you one shot it
Click to expand...

I have a sachet at home to try once I run down my stock of ilfosol 3 or just chuck it. I suspect it will randomly go off with no warning before I use it up!
 
That happened to my ilfosol after 5 months, wasn't impressed. Other than that it's a cracking developer I thought...shame the shelf life is pants.

Have yet to try rodinal but that's next on the list :)
 
I've developed XP2 in ID-11 & Ilfotech HC a few times & it's always produced good results. Hard to print though (at least I've found it that way), so if you're looking for something to wet print from I'd avoid it, but for scanning it's fine. And yes, it does have a slightly purple mask!

What about Tri-X, it's fast becoming my go-to film after HP5, which I only really use for its pushing capabilities. Tri-X is very punchy & sharp, it's considered the best photojournalist's film for those reasons (among others). FP4 is also good, but if you're wanting to experiment a lot I'd try not to get stuck with Ilford, their films all seem fairly similar.

Am I right in thinking Rollei Retro 100 is a re-branded APX100? If so, it's lovely. AG-Photographic are (or were) doing 10 rolls of it for 20 quid, cheaper than Silverprint's APX.


Mahoneyd187 said:
That happened to my ilfosol after 5 months, wasn't impressed. Other than that it's a cracking developer I thought...shame the shelf life is pants.

Have yet to try rodinal but that's next on the list :)
Click to expand...

Any time I've tried to use Ilfosol 3 I've either had clear or underdeveloped negs come out, even when put in longer at a higher temp. Maybe it's a shelf life thing, but I avoid it like the plague now :lol:
 
Last edited:
Ilfosol 3 is no good for HP5+ though. I will use it for the FP4+ 120 I have to dev though.
 
Mahoneyd187 said:
Have yet to try rodinal but that's next on the list :)
Click to expand...

I've only devved in Rodinal so far and definitely like it. Stock concentration and even 1+25 will give a lot of grain on anything faster than 200 or so. I'm using 1+50 as my standard now and it's nice even with grainy 400 speed films - some grain but nothing too offensive.
 
Alan Clogwyn said:
Definitely worth trying, though you'll need to experiment to find your times in whatever chemicals you use.
Click to expand...

:} I think so too.
It's on my new list of films I want to try!
 
@puggie Thats a valid thought that hadn't actually occured to me before. It's going to be much harder to focus a negative in the enlarger whilst wet printing in a darkroom with less grain to work with ~ I'll have to look out for the contrasted edges & shadows to ensure my prints are actually sharp!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top