School me on 35mm film you guys..

[ThomThomsk]

Start with one or two films and get to know them properly. That doesn't mean shooting a couple of rolls of each - it may mean 20 or 50 or 100, that will depend on you. You haven't said if you are developing your own, and you want to know about colour and b&w, which doesn't really narrow things down much, so I'll tell you what I did.

I chose two Ilford b&w films, HP5+ and FP4+. HP5+ is a 400 ISO traditional b&w film which has a bit of grain, good exposure latitude and the 400 speed means that it is 2 stops faster than a 100 ISO film, so hand held shots are more likely to be possible in lower light (especially as I use it in a 35mm rangefinder). If you wanted to use the Kodak equivalent, that would be Tri-X.

FP4+ is a 125 ISO traditional b&w film with very little grain, extremely wide exposure latitude and is my 'normal' film. It is so flexible it is hard to mess up and I mostly use it in 120 rather than 35mm, but the principles are the same. Don't know Kodak products well enough to tell you their equivalent.

If I wasn't developing my own then I would probably use Ilford XP2 Super, which is a C-41 process b&w film that can be processed at any mini-lab or supermarket. It is 400 ISO, fine grain and is capable of really excellent results. You can have HP5+ and FP4+ or any other conventional b&w film developed by a lab, but these days it probably means sending it away somewhere, and it is often more expensive.

 

[Rob]

My favourites are Fuji Reala 100 for negative colour and Ilford FP4 and HP5 for B&W. For C41 process B&W, the Kodak 400CN or whatever it is called has been really good, but the prints tend to be colour tinged purple/brown/green depending on the printers.

Film makes a tremendous difference to the satisfaction of my shots. I find for example, Kodak Gold 200 or Jessops 400 to give flat, dull results, whereas most of the Fuji range are what I'm looking for. The ideal film also depends on your camera - I've found that Kodak's Porta, VC, NC etc range work really well on Canon glass, but come out flat on Nikon. Pick a few good quality brands, such as Kodak, Fuji, Ilford and use one of their more premium ranges, chosen from a shop which keeps it refridgerated and I'm sure you'll be happy with the results.

Rob

 

[sincere]

Thank you so much you guys, this has defenitely helped me! One thing i do wonder is if there´s a difference if i use a color film, schan the pic and make it b/w in PS and using a b/w film from jump?

 

[Rob]

Thank you so much you guys, this has defenitely helped me! One thing i do wonder is if there´s a difference if i use a color film, schan the pic and make it b/w in PS and using a b/w film from jump?

What I used to do is shoot everything on Fuji Reala 100 and then get a CD with the prints and convert into B&W - at least that way you can choose which you're shooting. Also it's marginally cheaper than C41 B&W.

Rob

 

[JamesD]

Thank you so much you guys, this has defenitely helped me! One thing i do wonder is if there´s a difference if i use a color film, schan the pic and make it b/w in PS and using a b/w film from jump?

Yes, it does make a difference. Every color sensor, and every display medium, including the emulsion of plain old BW films, which are "sensitive to all colors," the sensor in the scanner, the pixels on your monitor, the emulsion on paper, the inks in your printer... every one of them is a little different with respect to the exact color they are most sensitive to or reflect the best... If you plot their sensitivities and/or reflectivities on a graph, they'll make a curve with a peak where they're most sensitive. So, those green trees might be a little lighter green in one color film, a little darker in another, a little more saturated in another, and so on. Same with displaying them: a print, a scan displayed on a monitor, and a digitized version printed out on an inkjet will all look a little different, even if they all came from the same negative.

Similarly, with BW, one film might be more sensitive to one shade of red than another, or less sensitive than a comparable color emulsion. So, when you scan each print (an original BW and an original color), then convert the color to BW, there'll be some differences. Sometimes, they're quite surprising, I've found.

Get to know your films properly, like Thom said, and learn what you have to do to them to get the image you want. Practice, practice, practice.

 

[Jeff Canes]

Tmax is for beginners? Ansel used it... I think.

Tmax came out sometime around l988-1992, Ansel may have used Tmax but it was not Ansel Adams he likely used Plus-X

 

[JamesD]

FP4+ is a 125 ISO traditional b&w film with very little grain, extremely wide exposure latitude and is my 'normal' film. It is so flexible it is hard to mess up and I mostly use it in 120 rather than 35mm, but the principles are the same. Don't know Kodak products well enough to tell you their equivalent.

Tmax came out sometime around l988-1992, Ansel may have used Tmax but it was not Ansel Adams he likely used Plus-X

Oh, yeah, that reminds me... Plus-X would be the equivalent. It's ISO 125.

 

[mysteryscribe]

First of all, I promised myself I wasn't going to do this (make personal comments on everything I saw) but here I am again.

I really had to stretch to remember all the black and white and color films I have used over the years. Anybody rememeber pan x or cps... those go back a day or two.

For many years I shot pictures for money and to please everyone but me. The film of color at the end was vps or fuji if I used a one hour comercial lab. If I shot any black and white at all, it was one of those c41 type things from ilford. Then I went into forced retirement and I'm reaquainting myself with black and whilte film.

Retro (for me) at this moment 120 or cut film. However I did buy a 50' roll of the hugarian/polish film from arista. I buy their 120 and cut film as well. Now this is just my take on it probably all wrong.

If you shoot a film, you should get a bunch of it and see what it will do. First learn to take what it gives you and use that. If I develop my film differntly it does differnt things by the way. I still don't think I can do all the film will do.

Then if it won't give you want you want, or you can't to the things you want to do, then go looking for another brand that is going to be slightly different. I would master a film first, then go looking for a specific thing in the next one before I flooded myself with what if's...

That's my plan anyway. Young, ie of any age, seem to be in too big a hurry to learn the craft. By the way I was the same, it isn't a new thing at all.

Anyway that's my take. By the way I have been shooting the same black and white film for three years and I still haven't worked out a standard development time with my crazy hot shot developer that I feel secure with. I do it all for the fun now, so I don't really care.

I do not recommend this approach, since I am hopelessly doing my own thing, just thought it might be interesting to one person or so.