Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Cheap high speed B/W films? / Extreme pushing?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Darkroom
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 9:48 pm    Post subject: Cheap high speed B/W films? / Extreme pushing? Reply with quote
I really love to shoot TriX 400 at high ISO (3200)
Results are imho very pleasing with Xtol 1+1 ~15:30min even with small 35mm film. Negatives look always very good if exposed correctly (less than +/- 0,5 stops).
http://forum.mflenses.com/collapsible-leitz-summicron-50-2-and-kodak-trix-400-iso3200-t53778,highlight,%2Biso3200.html
http://forum.mflenses.com/jupiter-3-1959-trix-400-iso-3200-t52302,highlight,%2B3200.html

I wonder if
- it's possible to push TriX-400 higher than 3200 in Xtol or other developers without much loss of tonal range?
- there are other "cheap" films are also that easy to push (ISO 1600 or more).
- it's possible to reach much higher ISOs when pushing native high ISO films

Any ideas?

Last edited by ForenSeil on Wed Oct 31, 2012 12:10 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 12:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I wouldn't call those results all that good, but they are acceptable, still a bit more grainy than ideal though.

I don't see the point in shooting at 3200 iso, I can't imagine why it would be necessary, even in the awfully dull light we have here in England right now, I can shoot 50 speed film with no issues, exposures in the order of f4 1/125.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 12:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
What was the question about cheap high speed film?


PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 2:58 pm    Post subject: Re: Cheap high speed B/W films? / Extreme pushing? Reply with quote
ForenSeil wrote:
I really love to shoot TriX 400 at high ISO (3200)
Results are imho very pleasing with Xtol 1+1 ~15:30min even with small 35mm film. Negatives look always very good if exposed correctly (+/- 0,5 stops max).
http://forum.mflenses.com/collapsible-leitz-summicron-50-2-and-kodak-trix-400-iso3200-t53778,highlight,%2Biso3200.html
http://forum.mflenses.com/jupiter-3-1959-trix-400-iso-3200-t52302,highlight,%2B3200.html

I wonder if
- it's possible to push TriX-400 higher than 3200 in Xtol or other developers without much loss of tonal range?
- there are other "cheap" films are also that easy to push (ISO 1600 or more).
- it's possible to reach much higher ISOs when pushing native high ISO films

Any ideas?


just briefly:
- I didn´t have good experience with pushing Tri-X over iso3200, shooted indoors - so the tonal range was very steep and graing huge. but it is worth trying if you want specific look
- Ilford Surveillance films may be considered cheap AND good for push-process. They have longer spectral sensitivity in red range, thus good especially for low-light shooting
- I have tried both ilford delta3200 and kodak tmax3200 pushed to around iso6400-12500 and I think that´s a limit for them in terms of acceptable tonality and grain (in 135format). however their original iso sensitivity is less than 3200, maybe 1250-1600 at maximum, so it is a good result I think.

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I don't see the point in shooting at 3200 iso, I can't imagine why it would be necessary, even in the awfully dull light we have here in England right now, I can shoot 50 speed film with no issues, exposures in the order of f4 1/125.
come on, how can you not imagine need for high ISO? what about shooting street at night? or indoor? surely using films@iso3200 in daylight is not the best option, but if you want to use specific grain and tonality, it can be used


PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 3:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Most 1600 and 3200 ISO films are really 400 or 800 native ISO with only slight emulsion modification,
and relabeled to sell for more Rolling Eyes Laughing
Knowleadgeable darkrooms guys know that, and in fact you'll see most of them pushing Tri-X to 1600
rather than buying a native 1600 ISO film (which don't exist anymore anyway, I think).
For this reason, pushing a 3200 ISO film further than 6400 is going to produce bad results
because the 3200 ISO is basically just a camouflaged 800 ISO film to start with Wink


PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 6:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I wouldn't call those results all that good, but they are acceptable, still a bit more grainy than ideal though.

I don't care about a little grain. I like grain. Tonal range is much more important than grain for me and it gets thinner and thinner when pushing, which makes necessary to expose very accurate.

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:

I don't see the point in shooting at 3200 iso, I can't imagine why it would be necessary, even in the awfully dull light we have here in England right now, I can shoot 50 speed film with no issues, exposures in the order of f4 1/125.

I'm using it mostly for party or indoors at evening; sometimes on street at night. Even ISO3200 is not enough for many situations.

berraneck wrote:

just briefly:
- I didn´t have good experience with pushing Tri-X over iso3200, shooted indoors - so the tonal range was very steep and graing huge. but it is worth trying if you want specific look
- Ilford Surveillance films may be considered cheap AND good for push-process. They have longer spectral sensitivity in red range, thus good especially for low-light shooting
- I have tried both ilford delta3200 and kodak tmax3200 pushed to around iso6400-12500 and I think that´s a limit for them in terms of acceptable tonality and grain (in 135format). however their original iso sensitivity is less than 3200, maybe 1250-1600 at maximum, so it is a good result I think.

Big thx! I will definitely look for these surveillance films! Do you know one by name?

I'm also considering to buy TMax 3200 or Delta 3200 and test and compare them to TriX at around 6400-12800 in Xtol
But they are so f*cking expensive


PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2012 10:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Names:

Ilford Surveillance P3
Ilford Surveillance P4

I have lot of them in my fridge, shooted some P4 at 3200 and resuklts are ok (developed in stock ID11). But it is hard to find those films today, my ~120m expired in 2009, ilford stopped producing them few years ago and you need to be lucky (or have good contacts) to find then somewhere.

http://david.asimov.cz/Fotografie0115-ilford.jpg


PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2012 2:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thx! I think I will buy this one: http://www.ebay.de/itm/Ilford-HP5-35mm-Meterware-17m-Surveillance-400-P4-R537-/271087208014?pt=DE_Analoge_Fotografischer_Film&hash=item3f1e0e864e


PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2012 3:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
do it, this is good price...


PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2012 9:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
@forenseil: bob answered for me:)

and yes, those delta-films are expensive, but don´t bother - TMax3200 production has stopped and if the market goes bad way, so will Delta3200. anyway, Delta3200 is made also in 120 format - coupled with some f2.8 lens TLR you can achieve pretty good results in bad light

Orio wrote:
Most 1600 and 3200 ISO films are really 400 or 800 native ISO with only slight emulsion modification,
and relabeled to sell for more Rolling Eyes Laughing
Knowleadgeable darkrooms guys know that, and in fact you'll see most of them pushing Tri-X to 1600
rather than buying a native 1600 ISO film (which don't exist anymore anyway, I think).
For this reason, pushing a 3200 ISO film further than 6400 is going to produce bad results
because the 3200 ISO is basically just a camouflaged 800 ISO film to start with Wink
orio it is true, that films pushed over iso3200 does not bring good results when judging by ussual criteria (width of tonal range + size of grain), and also cannot compete with what DLSR can deliver today. but if you from some reason need or want that look (short tonal range+huge grain), it is a way.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2012 9:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I bought this one http://www.ebay.de/itm/Ilford-HP5-35mm-Meterware-17m-Surveillance-400-P4-R537-/271087208014?pt=DE_Analoge_Fotografischer_Film&hash=item3f1e0e864e#ht_3024wt_929.

I read that it's the same emulsion as Ilford HP5. I hope that the expiration does not influence it badly.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2012 9:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
P4 is basically little tweaked HP5 to be sensitive to wider wavelenghts. and dont worry about expiration. there is probably no unexpired P3/P4 and there is no reasor to be worried about those few years. just keep the film in cold and you can use it for many years to come.


PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2012 8:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I just found that MACO TS EAGLE AQS (Agfa Aviphot 400S/Rollei Retro 400s) might be another alternative for the near future

It's also not in production anymore and I guess the results are not as good as with TriX or HP5 but at least it's also cheap and you can still buy unexpired product.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Darkroom
Page 1 of 1