film recommendations for fine art still life

Simon photo

Simon photo

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,220
Edit My Images
No
Hi yall! Right. So last i was researching for some gritty stuff, now im after something finer for my home studio.
I have gone as far as purchasing a roll of adox chs25 and shooting it in different circumstances as a test. Devved it in ro9 1+40 for 6 min with gentle agitation.
Now i have a feeling it was through poor execution on my behalf that i am unhappy with the results, mixture of things really, including exposure problems. But where i believe i got it right the images have a slightly mediocre feel to them.
I don't have examples to hand as im in work but what i have are very mid tone images with what i perceive as considerable grain, something i wasn't expecting from a fine grain film.
Can anyone recommend any alterations to my process for better results or even a good, sharp film with low grain that is suited to still life work?
 
Adox CHS 25 is quite a fiddly film to work with as it has quite low exposure latitude, i found it to be quite a low contrast film, so if you need some extra contrast to your images you will need a yellow filter.

If that still doesnt get the results you want then i can recommend Ilford PanF 50 or Fuji Acros 100. PanF is very fine grain but Fuji Acros is very smooth

If you post an example of what you unhappy with then maybe we can whittle it down to a developing or exposure problem :)
 
ok so im wired after work and thought heel to it here goes.
right, basically i havent taken notes on settings but the first is the camera on auto (om10)
IMG_0006-1.jpg

the next three are shot with continuous lighting from the modelling lights in my strobes, metered and camera set with the manual adapter and aperture adjusted as prompted
IMG_0004.jpg

IMG_0003-1.jpg

IMG_0002.jpg

and again, camera in auto mode
IMG-1.jpg

im looking at them now and thinking well they are not all that bad but perhaps i was expecting something more than i got?
most of the roll is pretty much the same including some experiments with trying to use my radio trigger for my e3 on my om10 and forgetting the sync speen for the om10
 
I found Kodak T-Max100 very fine grained (to the point I struggled to find grain to focus on).
 
Adox CHS25 is slow, but not remoely fine grained, yours look finer than mine though!

For the finest grain you can imagine make it Adox CMS 20, you'll need the special Adotech developer to go with it though which is expensive stuff, but you will have images as grainless as digital.
 
Thanks guys, i think i may try a roll of each mentioned to see what suits my needs.
This is a part of shooting film i love, the trail and error, finding combinations that work or don't for you. And having a place with people eager to help makes all the difference.
So i've got some acros 100 in the post, does anyone use stand development? Does it yield better results than shorter, agitated developments?
 
Alan Clogwyn said:
Adox CHS25 is slow, but not remotely fine grained
Click to expand...

I think you are doing something wrong then :shrug: even with rodinal i see essentially no grain
 
Simon photo said:
Thanks guys, i think i may try a roll of each mentioned to see what suits my needs.
This is a part of shooting film i love, the trail and error, finding combinations that work or don't for you. And having a place with people eager to help makes all the difference.
So i've got some acros 100 in the post, does anyone use stand development? Does it yield better results than shorter, agitated developments?
Click to expand...

I would avoid Adox CMS 20 as it is a high contrast technical film

Stand development has it's advantages and disadvantages, it takes an hour to do and if you use a bromide developer you may get streaky development. On the other hand it can help increase sharpness and keep some more detail in highlights and shadows
 
Yeah, CHS25 is a very fine grain film. It's rather intolerant of over exposure, so metering needs to be done well. CHS50 is notably better on the exposure latitude, and more rugged when developed. Pan F can be abused by comparison, and still come out fine.

Also, grain has nothing to do with format size...? it might do on a superficial level in that the film area to grain size ratio is bigger, but the actual size of the grain itself is nothing to do with the format.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top