Black and White film

Nisio

Hey,

I've gotten the loan of a nikon FM2 (I usually use a D80). I'd like to try out some black and white photography; apart from a short course in school x (or even xx years ago now :eek:) I haven't used film before. I've a couple of questions people might have the answers to?

What film should I get for typical landscape/street use? (is that even the same type of film?)

Can I get the film developed and scanned rather than getting the pictures printed? I guess the likes of Gunns do this in Dublin? What might the cost of processing a roll be?

Anything else I should be thinking about ? Any huge differences between shooting with film and digital ? (apart from no AP mode etc )

Can Brian Cowen lead us out of the recession? (eh that was a longer list of questions than I thought)

Thanks,

Oisin

humberklog

Try kick off with Kodak's bw400cn. This film is readily available in chemists etc. and costs around 5quid for 36exp. The advantage is that it is developed through the colour process. Therefore you can drop the roll in anywhere and have it loaded onto a cd (with negs) in done in 15 minutes. Costs vary but you shouldn't be paying anymore than 7 quid all in (another fiver for prints). If you are then complain and go somewhere else (fight the power!).
If you take on monochrome B+W film it will be more expensive per roll, takes longer to get back from shop and is a lot more expensive to develop.

Kodak's bw400cn is perfect for starting off on (and even staying with). I'd recommend this film and then expanding to filters and then onto .monochrome film

FinoBlad

the suggestion to try a chromogenic film which is developed in standard color chemistry is a good one.

i would suggest to you to try Ilford XP2 super. it has a great exposure lattitude and good contrast. since you know of gunns, why not go in there and chat to them and ask them what they recommend, they are the nicest people you could ever meet.

i_am_dogboy

I've not done much black and white, and I do process myself, but I've been most pleased with ilford delta 400, and the dirt cheap arista premium 400 stuff from freestylephoto.biz.

I can't comment on the b&w c41 stuff at all..

whitetea

I definitely wouldn't recommend anybody using a b&w film made for a C41 (colour process). Wouldn't be a fan of ilford delta 400 neither, even if i shoot many pictures on it. From the Kodak b&w probably the only one I would recommend is tri-x for landscape and t-max 400 for street photography, but only really If you are going to develop them yourself...

Now the films that I would recommend (I'm in love with them)...

1. Ilford HP5+ (ASA 400)

2. IlfordFP4+ (ASA 125)

Both give very consistent and good exposure, very tollerant. First one is extreamly versatile. Good for various lighting conditions. Classical grain, classical film for reportage ect. The grain from HP5+ was scanned and photoshoped into early digital pictures to give them a look that people were used to.
Second is perfect for landscape. Has a slightly smaller grain. Smooth, sharp, beautiful prints.

Another reason why I would recommend those films would be the fact that they give great results no mater what developer you're using. It is a really safe bet.

With developing its best If you'll develop them yourself... It's magical, you can fully control result you're getting (with some practice). I can write you some more about it, If you'd like.


P.S.: Many people is getting them from Channel Islands :
http://www.7dayshop.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=777_1&products_id=6078
http://www.7dayshop.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=777_1&products_id=6075

_________________________________________________________
Taking pictures is like tiptoeing into the kitchen late at night and stealing Oreo cookies. - Diane Arbus

Nisio

Thanks for all the recomendations;

Whitetea, am I right in thinking it's possible to develop negatives without a dark room?

How does the work flow change for film ?

shoot
develop negative
scan negative? print and scan?
process in a darkroom or using a computer?

I enjoyed developing film and making prints on that course but I can't see myself doing it on any large scale; it's too convenient to process digitally for me

Phototoxin

I definitely wouldn't recommend anybody using a b&w film made for a C41 (colour process). Wouldn't be a fan of ilford delta 400 neither, even if i shoot many pictures on it. From the Kodak b&w probably the only one I would recommend is tri-x for landscape and t-max 400 for street photography, but only really If you are going to develop them yourself...

I would disagree. I can heartily reccomend XP2. You can rate it from 50-800 ISO I think and its quite nice. However some places will print it as sepia (due to it being colour paper) while some compensate it and print it on B&W.

I have 2 rolls of CN400 but haven't tried it yet.

For 'true' B&W thoug the ilfords are ok but it depends on the grain effect you want. I personally like the XP2 grain and I tend to get my best people shots on it for some reason.

whitetea

Phototoxin wrote: »

I would disagree. I can heartily reccomend XP2. You can rate it from 50-800 ISO I think and its quite nice. However some places will print it as sepia (due to it being colour paper) while some compensate it and print it on B&W.

Another one can develop it slightly green, blue or magenta... I don't like it because you can't control the final result fully. Could be handy in some situations, but i can't imagine getting high quality results from it.

I didn't mean to offend you though... Everybody likes different things.

humberklog

Whitetea I'd agree with your choices too, but for myself.
I wouldn't for someone cracking open their first roll. For all the errors and misjudgements that will be made then better to have done them on a cheap accessable format. Doesn't leave such a bad taste in the mouth and saves on cat kicking. The C4 stuff will still give you enough of a feel for it without any of the financial pain.
2 rolls wouldn't do any harm but would do just enough to whet the appitite to venture further into the area.

Like a motorbike. Whizz about a little on a vespa before splashing out on a Motoguzzi.

whitetea

Nisio wrote: »

Thanks for all the recomendations;

Whitetea, am I right in thinking it's possible to develop negatives without a dark room?

How does the work flow change for film ?

shoot
develop negative
scan negative? print and scan?
process in a darkroom or using a computer?

I enjoyed developing film and making prints on that course but I can't see myself doing it on any large scale; it's too convenient to process digitally for me

You don't need a darkroom to develop films, you just need darkness. Why not trying to darken completely your bathroom or getting a special box with the sleeves that will not let the light in (forgot the name, but I can find out).

After you develop the films or you get them developed you can:
- scan the film and print the prints with a printer,
- make the prints yourself in a darkroom.

It depends on what you prefer really. I do both. If you want to scan them though you should use a very good scanner and that is going to cost. I believe you could ask Ed from Inspirational Arts (http://www.inspirationalarts.ie/) how much does he charge for scanning and I'm sure he'll do a great job.

If you want to do prints yourself you can hire a darkroom http://www.galleryofphotography.ie/darkrooms.html they have a reasonable prices.

whitetea

humberklog wrote: »

Whitetea I'd agree with your choices too, but for myself.
I wouldn't for someone cracking open their first roll. For all the errors and misjudgements that will be made then better to have done them on a cheap accessable format.

Hm.. I think If you get a roll of film from the shop I mentioned before and If you develop it yourself in Rodinal will end up being cheaper than c41. I think as well that "not a great first roll" is a great opportunity to learn darkroom techniques and all that. And after all.. good quality can only encourage a beginner to go further

whitetea

Nisio wrote: »

Anything else I should be thinking about ? Any huge differences between shooting with film and digital ?

Well obviausly you have to plan ahead... you can't just change sensitivity in the middle of the roll (well... you can, but is not as simple as digital).
You should get used to seeing the World in black and white, because the composition is going to be different than i colour pictures. With b&w is all about the textures and theme.

What kind of photographs do you do? Usage of filters gives very good results. You have to put the filter on your lens while taking the picture.. so you kind of manipulate it before even developing the film, because there is not much you can do after.

For street photography I would recommend constantly using yellow or bright orange filter not to be getting a blank sky all the time. Tell me what kind of photography you're planning to do, I might have some more advice

humberklog

whitetea wrote: »

Hm.. I think If you get a roll of film from the shop I mentioned before and If you develop it yourself in Rodinal will end up being cheaper than c41. I think as well that "not a great first roll" is a great opportunity to learn darkroom techniques and all that. And after all.. good quality can only encourage a beginner to go further

Fair point well made.

But whilst organizing all of that he could just pop into Boots and start clicking away. Pop them into the nearest place and have results the same day. (Not Gunn's as they are around 100% dearer than the cheaper alternative.) All the while he could be on the phone sorting darkroom, equipment and figuring out better film.

whitetea

whitetea wrote: »

special box with the sleeves that will not let the light in (forgot the name, but I can find out).

http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/007/007wuk-17503384.jpg

That is how it looks like anyway...

whitetea

humberklog wrote: »

Fair point well made.

But whilst organizing all of that he could just pop into Boots and start clicking away. Pop them into the nearest place and have results the same day. (Not Gunn's as they are around 100% dearer than the cheaper alternative.) All the while he could be on the phone sorting darkroom, equipment and figuring out better film.

Good one Patience is a good thing though... If you want to go to darkroom at all it would be good to have some
My darkroom teacher used to say that to get a great picture you can't rush too much. Do you want great pictures? Maybe I need updating though...

humberklog

My maths teacher told me that the best picture starts with the film wound correctly in the camera and the finger on the trigger. But he wore a wig and also gave advice about pulling girls.
Content is a big thing. What your capturing. B+W doesn't work for everything and c4 is a simpler route to finding this out.

whitetea

hm... Are trying to make fun of me?

Anyway.. You can just convert your digital colour photographs and see if b&w works for your pictures?

Ok. I think we're loosing the point here. I think we both made clear what advantages and disadvantages two type of films have, so a person looking for an advice can make up his mind.

Nisio, If you have any more questions for a slow, but high quality process fan, let me know. If you'll like the whole thing there is so much more you can learn. Don't want to overload you with information though. I'm passionate about darkroom and would be happy to help anybody that thinks, have enough patience for that.

Cheers

Nisio

Looks like your insomnia paid off for me

I think I might try a couple of rolls of that c41 processable film and have a poke around the internet to see what easy ways there are of developing my own negatives before I go down the route of full darkroom development. (might lessen the culture shock from digital to film )

Do people process in apartments at home etc? What do you do with the chemicals after use?

I've a 50mm and 28-85mm lens for the camera, I think it'll be landscape and urban stuff I'll try. Do you need to use filters when you take the picture? (it's not something that can be done in post production?).

Here are a few of my black and white digital conversions

thefizz

All you need is one of these changing bags if developing your own film. No darkroom required.

http://www.jessops.com/online.store/products/16707/Show.html?

Then if you want to make prints, use the Gallery of Photography in Temple Bar.

I never liked the C41 processed B&W film as the prints always had a blue or green cast if done in a shop/lab. I do agree that its an easy way to give film a go but developing the real stuff yourself is much more rewarding and addictive, in my opinion.

ThOnda

If you are going for C-41 lab processing, I would suggest using colour film - scans from monocrhomatic film has smaller dynamic range and the extra information from colour film will allow you to do better and more controlled processing when converting into BW picture.

whitetea

Nisio wrote: »

Do people process in apartments at home etc? What do you do with the chemicals after use?

I've a 50mm and 28-85mm lens for the camera, I think it'll be landscape and urban stuff I'll try. Do you need to use filters when you take the picture? (it's not something that can be done in post production?).

Hey, sure you can develop films at home That is what you're going to need:

- some sleeve bag that will allow you to put your films safely to the tank
- tank (http://www.thedarkroom.co.uk/products_class.php?getCategory=122&getBrand=14)
- thermometer,
- some measuring cups
- developer (I would recommend to start with Rodinal)
- rapid fixer (I use Ilford Rapid Fixer)
- then you can use some detergent (I use Fotonal) for a final wash.
- pure water
- clock

You can reuse chemicals few times and then just drain them in a sink.

You need to just filters when you take the picture (you don't have to but results will be much better), because its when you make a picture the whole conversion into b&w is done. In a postproduction you will look after contrast etc. You can see many examples on the internet of the usage of the different coulour filers. I'd say it is very important to use filters in landscape photography.

whitetea

whitetea wrote: »

Hey, sure you can develop films at home That is what you're going to need:

- some sleeve bag that will allow you to put your films safely to the tank
- tank (http://www.thedarkroom.co.uk/products_class.php?getCategory=122&getBrand=14)
- thermometer,
- some measuring cups
- developer (I would recommend to start with Rodinal)
- rapid fixer (I use Ilford Rapid Fixer)
- then you can use some detergent (I use Fotonal) for a final wash.
- pure water
- clock

You can get all that stuff in a good condition and very cheap second hand.

FinoBlad

Obviously developing your own black and white film is the goal. C41 developed film isn't the best there is but in suggesting this to you I considered the following....

Your FM2, how accurate will you be with metering with this? The latitude in XP2 Super is pretty forgiving. My first serious camera was also an FM and I know how frustrating it is when you don't get the exposures you want.

The price, you mention price and I'm assuming you are budget conscious. C41 dev and scan is more often cheaper than standard b+w film dev and scan.

Fuji also make a Neopan C41 b+w film which is sold in all the FujiFilm shops around.

Whether you are a 'walk before you run' or a 'jump in at the deep-end' type of person, thats up to you to decide. Good luck with whatever you do though, and enjoy.

Simplicius

Home Development is relatively cheap and you can do it in an apartment. I even have a darkroom in my apartment, I took over the second bathroom and put a sheet of ply across 75% of the bath to hold trays and my enlarger goes on a table that fits perfect around the loo, taking this out of play. as it has no external windows, it's ideal.

As for your choice of Film, stay away from the C41 films, they are not great and give very flat tones and labs don't know how to handle them and print them on colour paper.

for all round versatility and relative cheapness stick to one film and one developer. Neopan 400 is superb in Rodinal Special or Rodinal at high dilutions around 1:30 for special and 1:50 for old fashioned rodinal.

have fun most of all, as analog is far more hands one and far more 'alchemic' than digital. I personally feel I am creating more when using analog. The patience of waiting till the film is developed is a good experience, it makes you think about each shot.

Phototoxin

Analogue is definatly more fun - getting your hands dirty and seeing the roll come out after fixing is a true 'eureka' moment.

Another one can develop it slightly green, blue or magenta... I don't like it because you can't control the final result fully. Could be handy in some situations, but i can't imagine getting high quality results from it.

I didn't mean to offend you though... Everybody likes different things.

None taken and I agree that they could cock it up and you have green hued prints (happened me once), but a competent developing place should be able to sepia-ify it or monochrome-ify it depending on your preference. Plus being C-41 its only about €10 euros to buy, develop and print.