Makten
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.1 #5 · Film discussion thread | |
I didn't "come back" to film, since I started my photographing with a digital camera. So I don't have the common bias that many oldtimers do. 
What I've discovered, is that if you are scanning B&W film and processing it manually, sort of any film can give any "look". It's a matter of applying a curve that gives the tonality you want, which probably is much more difficult when optically enlarging on paper. Of course different films have various characteristics, but the choice of exposure and developer is far more important than the film itself. The largest visible difference I get between films is the grain, after processing them to a look that I want. But that processing gets easier if the film characteristics matches the look, even if it isn't necessary.
I've settled for Kodak Tmax 400 as my main B&W film (with Tmax dev.), because of it's versatility, tiny grain and higher contrast than for instance Tri-X. It can be exposed from ISO ~200 to 1250 without needing to alter the development, even if it of course would benefit from that.
I develop all my films at home, including C-41 and lately even E-6. I've only tried a few negative color films, and I don't think I like the modern Kodak ones. They have a huge latitude which is nice, but there are color casts in the shadows that are hard to get rid of. Specifically Portra 400 behaves a bit weird.
E-6 is the total opposite. It gives you only 5-7 stops of DR to play with, but the colors are just gorgeous. Even with my sloppy home developing in a simple Paterson tank, I've gotten far better colors than with the C-41 films.
Scanning is the worst part with B&W, or rather the processing. If you let the scanner software do everything for you, you'll end up with inferior results that very much can be mimiced with a digital camera. But scanning as a color positive, extracting the sharpest channel (in most cases blue) and then applying an individual curve for each images, gives results that – if the format is large enough and/or the scanner is good enough – will give you possibilities for tonality that digital just can't come close to.
Negative Color film is both worse and easier. The scanner software(s) does the conversion pretty good (Epson scan in my case), but if you want to scan "raw", it becomes a real PITA since you then manually have to exclude the orange film mask.
Slides scans very well on my Epson V700 and there's not much work at all needed in post processing. The drawback is the low DR (which also is beneficial for some work), tight tolerances for temperature during developing, and the high cost of the film itself.
----------------
I shoot mostly 6x7 medium format, so for 135 film you'll have issues with film flatness and too low resolution with consumer scanners. Anyway, here are some typical examples of each film type.
Tmax 400 underexposed one stop, developed normally. This gives a negative that's a bit thin, but the contrast in the midtones is still quite high, which made it very easy to process to desired result. The deepest shadows are blocked, but that's not a bad thing when you want blacks to be black.
Sheet by Martin Hertsius, on Flickr
Tri-X is a bit different, even if you can get sort of the same results as with Tmax. I'd say it gives "more shades of gray", which perhaps can be seen here. It's also not as sharp as Tmax and gives a larger grain, that can be nice.
Arbetsdomstolen by Martin Hertsius, on Flickr
Over to negative color film and Portra 400. This will give you an idea of the color casts that I mentioned. Looks nice, but not "natural".
Ride by Martin Hertsius, on Flickr
Kodak Ektar is more punchy but have quite similar problems/colors as Portra, at occasion. The colors are bold and the contrast is higher, while still managable for large DR scenes. A bit colder rendering than Portra too, which I like.
Forklift by Martin Hertsius, on Flickr
I've only developed two slide films at home so far, but I love it! Much, much nicer results than C-41. This is Fujichrome Provia 400X.
Nackademien by Martin Hertsius, on Flickr
As you can see, the low contrast scene is rendered with a punch, color richness and contrast that is very far from negtive film. Perfect for overcast weather.
Oh, I have something from a roll of Provia 100F too, that is the only roll of film that I ever sent away for development. The colors are very much like the Provia 400X actually; a bit cold for anything but pure daylight.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v621/Makten/Fujica_GM670/img004-1.jpg
|
