What films do you use and why?

cambsno

cambsno

Suspended / Banned
Messages
20,999
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
Yes
Lots of choice out there, and I admit to not having a great understanding of all the types. Had some Ektar processed last week and was not hugely impressed with the look. Portra for me is the no.1 for colour, but keen to see what people think to other colour films (most of what I shoot contains people).

B&W tends to be Ilford, had some Delta 400 done recently which i though was grainy. Especially keen on films with less grain.
 
I'm a black and white photographer who rarely uses colour, and when I do it's a Fuji negative film that I can buy over the counter at a local dealers. I have no brand loyalty as such, preferring Kodachrome. With that gone, I have no plan B...

Black and white is perhaps even less rational. When I started photography seriously, I noted that AP used Pan F for the lens tests, and reckoned that if that was good enough for them it would be fine for me. I tried other slow films (I've always hated grain vehemently) and liked the 20ASA Adox film, but didn't conmtinue with it. When I moved up to medium format, I stuck with Pan F (and FP4 when I wanted a fast film - I stayed within the same stable). With 5x4, Pan F isn't an option so I stick to FP4.

I generally don't like experimenting, and prefer to keep things simple - hence two films and one developer.

I have tried Tech Pan, but didn't find that the lack of grain was enough to compensate for the extra processing complexity, and I don't enlarge enough to show grain (12x16 max from 6x7 and 20x16 from 5x4). My degree of enlargement is limited by a determination not to go above 5 or 6 times magnification to reduce quality loss.
 
Portra 400 for colour. Seems to have given all round good results for me with a big latitude for overexposure.
Pro400H has given good results for me too, especially in good sunlight. I do like the pastel colours from it too.

For Black and White I used to always sway to Tri-X, again for similar reasons to Portra. I've played with overexposing this quite a bit and found the results still to be great and contrasty.
Although I now opt for HP5. Not a lot between it, but I've found some of the results, especially when home scanned, to be more pleasing to my eye.

I haven't toyed with loads of different film stocks. I've found my results with the above to be pretty much consistent with a good amount of room for overexposure, so tend to opt for them as a go-to choice.
Would like to give slide film a look at some point.
 
Last edited:
Portra 400 is my favourite colour negative film by quite a margin, but I'm also fond of Ektar when it's bright enough to use a slower film.

B&W is a little different for me, I used to use FP4 and HP5, but then I bought a couple rolls of Delta 100 and fell in love with it. I also like the 400 but, like yourself, I find it a little grainier than I'd like. It's important to remember that grain is down to more than just the film selection, your choice of developer and even your personal processing method will affect it greatly (I'm always trying to find out how to minimise grain during development but I've not found out how yet, apart from switching to HC110 from Rodinal, but that's a problem for another thread one day!)

I haven't shot a lot of slide film but I do think they are spectacular to look at held up to a light source, like little stained glass windows. The colours are really magical too. The reason that I rarely use slide film is because it's easy to blow the highlights and is a bit harder to get developed ("harder" probably isn't the best word, C41 is just easy peasy!). If I had a projector then I might use it more, but as I scan all my film I don't think the pros outweigh the cons.
 
I personally shoot colour negative, slide and B&W films as and when the scene dictates.

When it comes to colour, I shoot Portra 160, Fuji Provia 100F and Velvia 50. My preference is towards slide as I love a good landscape shot on slide and I'll choose which depending on the colours in the scene. I used to find slide slightly easier to get right at the scanning - that was until I found portra 160 - and slide, per sheet, is marginally cheaper (~£80 for 20 sheets of slide vs ~£50 for 10 sheets of portra 160). Equally, colour neg has a vastly superior dynamic range to slide, so as said, I tend to let the scene dictate what I shoot. Grain is of no real concern, so ISO doesn't bother me. I send away for developing. I too tried Ektar but found it so hard to scan, I soon looked for something else.

For B&W, I find myself sticking to just one film of late, and that's acros 100. Love love love this film. Very smooth, contrasty and excellent reciprocity failure. Price wise it's fine and it develops well in Rodinal. I used to shoot Adox CHS25 and, if it were still made, I'd still shoot it now. I have one box in the freezer which I really should shoot, but really, I just wish Adox would reintroduce an ISO 25 B&W film in sheet format. When I shot B&W in 120, I was quite partial to PanF as well.
 
For colour, I usually use Agfa Vista 400, because I'm a cheapskate, and most of what I shoot doesn't deserve a more expensive film. I would prefer to shoot Portra 400, and probably should before the box I have goes too far out of date. For really special occasions, I still have 10 rolls of Reala 100 (expired 2007), which is just delicious! Ektar, I thought I hadn't shot any, and wasn't going to given what people say about how tricky it is to get right, then I noticed that I had shot a roll one summer here, and the shots were lovely and saturated. We're likely going to Italy fairly soon, and I'm thinking of getting some to take...

I've not shot slide much (recently... used to shoot loads of Kodachrome and Ektachrome), couple of Velvia 100, some Provia, maybe one roll of Agfa Precisa. Lovely but hard to get pleasing results.

Black and white... it's been mostly TriX for a year or so, with some Delta 400 thrown in. The latter was more grainy than I'd expected. @srichards gave me an expired roll of Delta 100 at the Llandudno meet, and I really liked it, but somehow trying it again hasn't released the same magic. I don't like HP5, but have just slotted in a roll of FP4, and I even have some PanF somewhere.

Almost all at 135, barely shoot any 120...
 
I was using Vista because it was cheap but I've found I've gone off it. I seem to prefer the old kodak cheapo stuff. That's when I can actually be bothered to get the camera out. I don't bother with normal black and white as it doesn't scan well. I will use xp2 as it does.

I still have the single use camera from last year and the same roll of vista I started last year. I'm not sure I can be called a film user any more! I have a shelf full of unused films slowly going out of date. 120 portra, extar and some fuji. Other fuji 135 and some ilford xp2 and probably a stray roll of delta. Several vista and some of the weird cheap slide film that has to be loaded and unloaded in gloom.
 
srichards said:
I was using Vista because it was cheap but I've found I've gone off it. I seem to prefer the old kodak cheapo stuff. That's when I can actually be bothered to get the camera out. I don't bother with normal black and white as it doesn't scan well. I will use xp2 as it does.

I still have the single use camera from last year and the same roll of vista I started last year. I'm not sure I can be called a film user any more! I have a shelf full of unused films slowly going out of date. 120 portra, extar and some fuji. Other fuji 135 and some ilford xp2 and probably a stray roll of delta. Several vista and some of the weird cheap slide film that has to be loaded and unloaded in gloom.
Click to expand...

h'mm surely you don't mean Kodak colorplus, although I like gold esp when I pick it up for peanuts at the bootie ;)
 
Ilford Pan F 120 for pinhole because standing around for ages is what makes pinhole photography fun. It's a bit like forming a queue for something that no-one else wants. With a tripod.

Fuji Instax mini and Fuji Instax wide because some people forget that photography shouldn't always be taken too seriously.

Agfa Vista Plus because it's a pound. It makes me feel cheap.
 
Well as i've been using 8-14 year old 120 and just have a few rolls left, will have to buy some more 120 neg....so have you guys come to a conclusion in what is best for scenery Portra 160 or Ektar (can't find any slow Fuji)
 
excalibur2 said:
so have you guys come to a conclusion in what is best for scenery Portra 160 or Ektar (can't find any slow Fuji)
Click to expand...

Fuji Pro 160NS?

There's plenty of 'slow' Fuji and it's great. Well, all of those films are great, really; it's just a matter of how well they fit what you're looking for.
 
skysh4rk said:
Fuji Pro 160NS?

There's plenty of 'slow' Fuji and it's great. Well, all of those films are great, really; it's just a matter of how well they fit what you're looking for.
Click to expand...


Ah the first link I clicked on in google didn't show it...............but have noticed Portra and Fuji adverts emphasise how good they are for skin tones which when compared to Ektar might not have the best punch for scenery...h'mm I suppose I'll have to try all three over time and start with Ektar.
 
excalibur2 said:
Ah the first link I clicked on in google didn't show it...............but have noticed Portra and Fuji adverts emphasise how good they are for skin tones which when compared to Ektar might not have the best punch for scenery...h'mm I suppose I'll have to try all three over time and start with Ektar.
Click to expand...

To say that I've used heaps of 160NS over the last few years would be an understatement. For my purposes, it's capable of handling much more than just skin tones:






 
Is 160NS a forgiving film, RJ, or hard to get right (like the rumours about Ektar)?
 
Well RJ are you trying to confuse me in what film to choose :D
 
ChrisR said:
Is 160NS a forgiving film, RJ, or hard to get right (like the rumours about Ektar)?
Click to expand...

It's pretty forgiving, yeah. The only thing that you have to watch out for is highlights turning slightly pinkish if you seriously overexpose it (more than five stops), but I rather like the pinkish highlights actually, so I don't worry about this too much. I use it often when I travel and for most of my long exposures and night time photography.

excalibur2 said:
Well RJ are you trying to confuse me in what film to choose :D
Click to expand...

At the end of the day, it's more about what the photographer does than it is his choice of film, especially amongst those three emulsions. I know that these films can all outperform me.
 
Last edited:
Shame Fuji discontinued Reala as it's my favourite film for scenery in 35mm and the shots would be even better using 120.
On the bay a guy has 5 for £32 inc postage exp 2014 I'll offer him £15.

h'mm offer declined :(
 
Last edited:
cambsno said:
B&W tends to be Ilford, had some Delta 400 done recently which i though was grainy. Especially keen on films with less grain.
Click to expand...

Dunno what the sketch is with that but how a film is developed has more of a baring on grain visibility than virtually anything else.
You can make iso 20 trad b/w film look grainy if you put your mind to it.
If you decide you want smooth grain but need 400 speed film, you have to choose a film, developer and process method that work together.
Delta 400 is really slick and smooth processed normally in Xtol or ID-11..:)
 
If I can use many rolls of Ektar with success in Iceland, it can't be that difficult! I love it, it's such a beautiful film. I favoured the Kodak stuff, although haven;t tried Portra 800 (Have two boxes in) but had to stock up on Fuji Pro 400H when there was a Portra shortage. I have a few rolls away at the moment so will see how it is when it comes back. :)

I also have 5 rolls of Reala 100, 120 in the classifieds. I priced mine on those I could find on eBay etc but will accept offers (although not £15).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
gazmorton2000 said:
If I can use many rolls of Ektar with success in Iceland, it can't be that difficult! I love it, it's such a beautiful film. I favoured the Kodak stuff, although haven;t tried Portra 800 (Have two boxes in) but had to stock up on Fuji Pro 400H when there was a Portra shortage. I have a few rolls away at the moment so will see how it is when it comes back. :)

I also have 5 rolls of Reala 100, 120 in the classifieds. I priced mine on those I could find on eBay etc but will accept offers (although not £15).
Click to expand...

Ah that makes suspicious in that if the results from Reala were better than Ektar then you wouldn't be selling it.......So far Reala is my favourite film as I have plenty in 35mm and haven't tried Ektar and Portra yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top