The return journey back to film :)

jamesoliverstone

jamesoliverstone

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,145
Name
James
Edit My Images
No
Well, I decided that after getting my D700 with some nice pro glass, I wanted a film camera again that can use the lenses.

I have just won on ebay (I hope its not a scam) A Nikon F4S with MB-21 grip and MF-23 control back.

I hope this will be as good as I hope as I have extensivly researched this body.

Question is, I want to use this primarily for B&W exposures... can someone recommened a really good B&W film that has excellent texture to the image?

Any help would be greatly appreciated :D
 
Texture ??

Best way to choose a film is to try a few.
Are you going to soup them because the processing can have a huge effect on the final image.
 
joxby said:
Texture ??

Best way to choose a film is to try a few.
Are you going to soup them because the processing can have a huge effect on the final image.
Click to expand...

Sorry, by texture I meant a good quality and visually appealing grain. I like my B&W's to have real depth and texture to the image, but I suppose this mainly comes down to processing and paper choice?

Can you recommend a good place to get them processed? Or am I ok just dropping them into Jessops?
 
could try ilford b and w lab thingymajig, search this forum for it. steve smith speaks very highly of them-i might use them when get this film finished

EDIT: here they are http://www.ilfordlab.com/
 
jamesoliverstone said:
Sorry, by texture I meant a good quality and visually appealing grain. I like my B&W's to have real depth and texture to the image, but I suppose this mainly comes down to processing and paper choice?

Can you recommend a good place to get them processed? Or am I ok just dropping them into Jessops?
Click to expand...

If you're not going to process them yourself (and if not, why not?:lol:) then I'd probably recommend sending them away to Ilford for processing.

Edit: beaten to the draw by fontmoss... But I'd definitely second the Ilford Labs - I sent my first 2-3 films to them (mainly as I was testing the camera out and didn't want to introduce another set of possible error circumstances) , and they were fantastic - the prints were excellent too - proper silver gelatine black and white's - Lovely!
 
fontmoss said:
could try ilford b and w lab thingymajig, search this forum for it. steve smith speaks very highly of them-i might use them when get this film finished

EDIT: here they are http://www.ilfordlab.com/
Click to expand...

TheBigYin said:
If you're not going to process them yourself (and if not, why not?:lol:) then I'd probably recommend sending them away to Ilford for processing.
Click to expand...


Cheers :thumbs:

Well, funny you should say that as it was my next question.

I havent shot film in maybe 8-9 years, and I always took my shots to boots for processing back then.

So, if I wanted to process my own B&W (which I really would love to do) where should I start with learning how to do this?

For those of you that do this all day long, is there a good (and not too expensive) setup that I can have at home? Also, any good reading on tips/technique as the last time I processed my own film was at college and that was far too long ago for me to remember lol :D
 
jamesoliverstone said:
Sorry, by texture I meant a good quality and visually appealing grain. I like my B&W's to have real depth and texture to the image, but I suppose this mainly comes down to processing and paper choice?

Can you recommend a good place to get them processed? Or am I ok just dropping them into Jessops?
Click to expand...

Well, I think all film frames are visually appealing with or without grain, they all have their own imperfections.
Film grain just looks fine, I'm not sure there is a quality of grain, more an amount or strength of grain.
Grain depends on all sorts of stuff, you can shoot some 3200 @ iso 1000, develop it normally and that makes some nice looking grain, or you can shoot some fp5 and push process it.
I shot some fp4 and souped it in rodinal, its supposed to be fine grain but I dunno maybe my rodinal was off, it was grainy as hell...
What I'm saying is you have to experiment to find what you're looking for.

Processing, right well if you aren't going to do it, your slightly stuffed, your choice of film is narrowed to those which can be developed in C41 chemicals because that's all the hight streets do these days, unless snappy snaps are doing traditional b/w chemical development.

You need to think about scanning.......or printing...:lol:
 
Ilford xp2 SUPER 400 has a very appealing yet warm grainy feel to it
 
Its funny you started this thread as I am considering dumping digital (hence me buying some cheap film bodies) and going back to film after 20 odd years, if I do get my film mojo back then all my digital gear will appear in the classified section and a suitable f5 body sought
 
joxby said:
You need to think about scanning.......or printing...:lol:
Click to expand...

Um.... so I can just scan the neg using a negative scanner, but I assume you have to do something with the roll of film first before you can do that?

Sorry for the stupid questions, but its been an age since I ever worked with film :(
 
jamesoliverstone said:
Um.... so I can just scan the neg using a negative scanner, but I assume you have to do something with the roll of film first before you can do that?

Sorry for the stupid questions, but its been an age since I ever worked with film :(
Click to expand...




Yes, you have to develop the film, I find washing up far more difficult...:lol:

If you already have a neg scanner, there is no reason to involve anybody else, developing b/w is very easy..
 
If you don't want to ask in your own thread....:thinking:.....errr, search the film forum...:D
 
Well, I think I have a list of things I need to process my own films, I guess you just have to jump in and give it a go, after all, might as well get the practise in as it will be cheaper in the long run than sending films to ilford to process :)
 
jamesoliverstone said:
I found this PDF on the Ilford site, and it certainly seems quite complicated!

http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/200629163442455.pdf

I assume that temperatures and times need to be very accurate to get this right?
Click to expand...

From what I remember James... :suspect: ... it is actually surprisingly easy especially for mono and the temperature thing is not so critical for B & W either... :shrug: ... for heavens sake you don't even need a darkroom if you are going to scan the negs... :eek:


Good luck... :thumbs:




:p
 
:lol: ... I'm a lazy git and do that anyway... :D


Boots for colour 135 and Peak Imaging for the rest although I will probably use Ilford for B & W in future... ;)





:p
 
jamesoliverstone said:
Question is, I want to use this primarily for B&W exposures... can someone recommened a really good B&W film that has excellent texture to the image?
Click to expand...

Pretty much every B&W film has its own dedicated group on flickr e.g. Neopan and TriX so you could have a look over those to get a feel for how each film can look.

Highly recommend Ilford Labs btw. When the postal strike is sorted I shall be using them exclusively until I convince myself I can do it at home.
 
jamesoliverstone said:
Thanks venom, I will give it a go and if I completely fluff roll after roll, I will just send them away insted :lol:
Click to expand...


You won't fluff anything, and even if you do its all part of the thing...:lol:
Everyone here will support you if you need it, its very easy, in fact you have to be a proper lazy lump or green or both not to do your own.....:p
 
My recommendation to beginners is to try Ilford FP4+ and HP5+. The first is ISO 125 and the second is ISO 400 so choose a film to suit your light conditions.

If you don't want to process the film yourself there are a couple of options:

1. Use Ilford's process and print service.

2. Use Ilford XP2 film. This is an ISO 400 black and white film which is designed to be processed in C41 colour chemistry. i.e. any high street mini-lab can process it. If you get them to do prints as well they will come out with a slight colour cast as they are printed on colour paper,

The Ilford service gives real black and white prints on proper photographic paper.

http://www.ilfordlab.com/page/57/Black-and-White-Prints-from-Film.htm

If you want to have a go at processing yourself for hardly any expense, I'm sure I could find a spare processing tank I could send you. I could put a sail on it and float it across the Solent to you!



Steve.
 
joxby said:
in fact you have to be a proper lazy lump or green or both not to do your own.....:p
Click to expand...

:eek: ... Oi... :suspect: ...



... I resemble that remark... :shrug:






08.gif

 
gingerjon said:
Do you know if that's also true of the Fuji and Kodak C41 films ... and are they any good?!
Click to expand...

I don't know much about the Fuji film. The Kodak version has an orange base to make it easier to print on colour paper whereas the Ilford base is clear which assists in printing on traditional black and white paper.

Both scan well from what I have heard.

I am assuming the Fuji film is similar to Ilford as I seem to recall reading somewhere that Fuji worked with Ilford in the design of the XP film.


Steve.
 
Must admit that HP5+ is my all time favourite - used to use Neopan 400 (mostly pushed to 800) as that was really forgiving for press work.

Now I just take pics for myself though it's back to HP5+ as I appreciate the ISO 400 speed over FP4+.

Easy enough to process at home with minimal kit (when I get the time!) :bonk:
 
i'm also a big fan of HP5+, thoug hi must admit that i very much like pushing it quite a bit, sometimes all the way to 1600 ;) very nice & felxible film, that - great starting point.

The Delta400 is also a good place to start - nice results forthcoming between iso 200 and 800 (not a fan of pushing this one above 800).
 
Another vote for Ilford FP4+ and HP5+. These are the two films I mostly use with an occasional use of Pan F and the Delta versions.

As Steve suggested, I'd start off with these two as they are very flexible films, and the HP5+ can be uprated if required. The FP4+, although a slower film, is capable of producing lovely enlargements as it's a fine grain film.

As has already been mentioned, I'd certainly recommend the Ilford labs if you don't fancy doing them yourself. The prints I've seen from them were truly outstanding.
 
Steve Smith said:
I don't know much about the Fuji film. The Kodak version has an orange base to make it easier to print on colour paper whereas the Ilford base is clear which assists in printing on traditional black and white paper.

Both scan well from what I have heard.

I am assuming the Fuji film is similar to Ilford as I seem to recall reading somewhere that Fuji worked with Ilford in the design of the XP film.


Steve.
Click to expand...

The fuji C41 is pretty much the same as XP2, i've just compared a neg from each, and the film carrier background is exactly the same shade - ie grey rather than orange. Both definitely scan well - now i've got a decent scanner at least :lol:

Though, to be honest, unless I absoloutely NEED to turn a roll around into prints within a hour or so, I'd rather use FP4/HP5/Delta and soup them myself.
 
TheBigYin said:
snip...
Though, to be honest, unless I absoloutely NEED to turn a roll around into prints within a hour or so, I'd rather use FP4/HP5/Delta and soup them myself.
Click to expand...

:lol: And that's a post i'd never thought I'd be making 6 months ago... before a certain member of this parish donated a dev. tank and a couple of bottles of chemicals to me (:wave: thanks again Joxby :thumbs:)

But if someone like me with fists of ham and fingers of butter can follow that .pdf file from Ilford and within 45 minutes go from taking the film from the camera to having a strip of neg's hanging in the shower cubicle to dry, anyone can!
 
gingerjon said:
Do you know if that's also true of the Fuji and Kodak C41 films ... and are they any good?!
Click to expand...

Not tried the Fuji one but did use a few rolls of the Kodak C41 stuff a couple of years ago. Got them deved and printed at Jessops and was disappointed, then I scanned them at home and got much better results.

Over all the Kodak is 400iso and quite fine grain and is really nice when scanned properly. :D
 
:) oh I wish this thread hadn't appeared.

I'm currently using film at college and absolutely loving the darkroom. I'm very tempted to buy a developing tank and scanner although my favourite bit of the process is enlarging and printing (can't quite justify a full darkroom at home right now).

I found HP5 to be a great film but haven't had any experience of other films to offer a comparison.
 
jamesoliverstone said:
A Nikon F4s with MB-21 grip and MF-23 control back.
Click to expand...

I have one of these and they are great, mind you I still haven't work out how to use half the functions of the MF-23 and I have an instruction book :lol:
 
Great to come across people going back to film again. As a film only practitioner I would recommend the Ilford delta range (from what you ask, it seems suitable to your needs). Delta 100 with a tri-pod will give excellent results in the right hands. Delta 400 is excellent too. If you want a nice bit of arty grain slip a roll of Kodac TriX into your camera. The contrasts with this film are peerless. If you want to have really good results I recommend developing yourself. Dont go near a lab, too expensive and limited creative control. Ilford preceptol developer on delta 100 will give sumptious results, very fine grain and excellent sharpness (exposure/lens dependent of course).
Developing is extremly simple, I do it at home (in my ensuite bathroom) and scan all negs. I choose what I need to print from there and off to dark room I go.
let me know how you get on or if you need to know anything else.
that F4 is a classic by the way, nice choice.
 
dylan36 said:
that F4 is a classic by the way, nice choice.
Click to expand...

I agree. I prefer the F2 - the last completely mechanical/manual "F" - but I had a chance to buy a beautiful F4 from a friend who was dumping film for digital a few years ago and turned it down. I think the price was a bit more than I really wanted to pay, and I don't like haggling with friends. I seem to remember that there was a glut of Nikon SLR bodies on the market at the time, and I just assumed that I could get one later, if I wanted to, but they didn't last long. Pity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top