35mm film suggestions for landscapes, architecture and LE's
  • User avatar
    Plays with Light
    Reporter
    Reporter
    Posts: 1354
    Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 10:34 pm
    Location: Lost In Thought
    Contact:

    35mm film suggestions for landscapes, architecture and LE's

    by Plays with Light » Thu Jul 24, 2014 1:07 pm

    Howdy All,

    I was wondering what your experiences and recommendations would be for some 35mm film to use with landscapes and architectural pictures?

    After countless hours scouring the inter web, I have come up with three films to start my journey with, but really would appreciate your input, with attention to architecture and landscapes.

    Ilford:
      FP4 Plus 125
      HP5 Plus 400

    Kodak
      Tmax 100

    Any suggestions for long exposures in daylight, going up to say 3 to 5 minutes in length? Something at 25 or 50 maybe?

    Initially, I will not be developing the film myself, but will use a place in the CBD that comes highly recommended.

    Thanks in advance.
    Alex
    Feedback and honest, constructive criticism is greatly appreciated.
  • User avatar
    Doug
    Reporter
    Reporter
    Posts: 1831
    Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 8:49 pm
    Location: Adelaide
    Contact:

    Re: 35mm film suggestions for landscapes, architecture and L

    by Doug » Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:10 pm

    For 3-5 min exposures in daylight you probably want to set the camera up to use your ND filters.

    I was not very experimental with film.
    Back in the day I just wanted a slow film for from the tripod landscape shots. All I ever remember using was Iford PanF 50 ASA for B+W.

    Walter would be your man for suggesting films that have characteristics closest to the look you go for in digital.
  • User avatar
    Plays with Light
    Reporter
    Reporter
    Posts: 1354
    Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 10:34 pm
    Location: Lost In Thought
    Contact:

    Re: 35mm film suggestions for landscapes, architecture and L

    by Plays with Light » Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:42 pm

    Doug wrote:For 3-5 min exposures in daylight you probably want to set the camera up to use your ND filters.

    I was not very experimental with film.
    Back in the day I just wanted a slow film for from the tripod landscape shots. All I ever remember using was Iford PanF 50 ASA for B+W.

    Walter would be your man for suggesting films that have characteristics closest to the look you go for in digital.


    You read my mind, again, Doug! 13 to 20 stops of ND filters was my thought, metering with the old Lunasix meter. Now that I have the 7.5 to 15 degree attachment for it, I should be able to meter the highlights pretty well for most scenes and for those that demand an even tighter area of metering, I'll have to use my DSLR, until I find a working 1 degree spot meter in my price range.

    I don't expect to be able to get the same look, but sort of close would be cool. Next year in the darkroom, I'll learn more about old school dodging and burning techniques. Right now, I just want to play with film, then papers and developing next year.

    I was admiring some scans from film of yours earlier, in an old thread here, with images scanned for you by someone. Pure NZ beauty! 8)
    Feedback and honest, constructive criticism is greatly appreciated.
  • W G
    Photojournalist
    Photojournalist
    Posts: 2125
    Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:25 am
    Location: Sydney
    Contact:

    Re: 35mm film suggestions for landscapes, architecture and L

    by W G » Thu Jul 24, 2014 9:19 pm

    Alex,

    From what I already know of your work and some of the stated techniques you plan to employ there are really only TWO emulsions to consider as a starting point:

    Kodak T-Max 100 (TMX)

    and

    Fuji Acros (if it is still available)

    Why? Because these modern T-Grain emulsions have very very fine grained, sharp and smooth toned characteristics with minimal reciprocity departure.

    What is reciprocity departure?

    With longer exposures the sensitivity of the film decreases exponentially as exposure time increases and the contrast - and thereby the development necessary - also shifts.

    What this might mean is that with a conventional emulsion such as Tri-X or FP4+ an indicated exposure allowing for the NDs and low light might be, for argument's sake, 1 minute. But reciprocity departure might mean that you recalculate the exposure time to as much as 5 minutes. And then the development time might need to be reduced by 30% or more.

    Without the long exposures my recommendation would also include FP4+ which is a cracker of a classic film.

    Just a starting point ....
    Walter Glover

    "Photography was not a bastard left by science on the doorstep of art, but a legitimate child of the Western pictorial tradition." —Robert Galassi
  • W G
    Photojournalist
    Photojournalist
    Posts: 2125
    Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:25 am
    Location: Sydney
    Contact:

    Re: 35mm film suggestions for landscapes, architecture and L

    by W G » Thu Jul 24, 2014 9:40 pm

    Here is a link to the data sheet for T-Max. Look at page 5 for long exposure info:

    http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professi ... /f4016.pdf

    Compare that with FP4+ graph on page 2:

    http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/201 ... 850702.pdf
    Walter Glover

    "Photography was not a bastard left by science on the doorstep of art, but a legitimate child of the Western pictorial tradition." —Robert Galassi
  • User avatar
    Plays with Light
    Reporter
    Reporter
    Posts: 1354
    Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 10:34 pm
    Location: Lost In Thought
    Contact:

    Re: 35mm film suggestions for landscapes, architecture and L

    by Plays with Light » Thu Jul 24, 2014 9:55 pm

    W G wrote:Alex,

    From what I already know of your work and some of the stated techniques you plan to employ there are really only TWO emulsions to consider as a starting point:

    Kodak T-Max 100 (TMX)

    and

    Fuji Acros (if it is still available)

    Why? Because these modern T-Grain emulsions have very very fine grained, sharp and smooth toned characteristics with minimal reciprocity departure.

    What is reciprocity departure?

    With longer exposures the sensitivity of the film decreases exponentially as exposure time increases and the contrast - and thereby the development necessary - also shifts.

    What this might mean is that with a conventional emulsion such as Tri-X or FP4+ an indicated exposure allowing for the NDs and low light might be, for argument's sake, 1 minute. But reciprocity departure might mean that you recalculate the exposure time to as much as 5 minutes. And then the development time might need to be reduced by 30% or more.

    Without the long exposures my recommendation would also include FP4+ which is a cracker of a classic film.

    Just a starting point ....


    Thank you, Walter. You are a God-send! Am busy reading up on reciprocity failure now, to get a better grasp on it, although you have been very thorough with your explanation.

    Fuji Acros 100 is still available, will add that to the shopping list and clear some room in the fridge. Should the emulsion/film be stored in airtight container with some desiccant? Or is just an airtight container enough?
    Feedback and honest, constructive criticism is greatly appreciated.
  • User avatar
    Doug
    Reporter
    Reporter
    Posts: 1831
    Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 8:49 pm
    Location: Adelaide
    Contact:

    Re: 35mm film suggestions for landscapes, architecture and L

    by Doug » Thu Jul 24, 2014 9:57 pm

    Plays with Light wrote:I was admiring some scans from film of yours earlier, in an old thread here, with images scanned for you by someone. Pure NZ beauty! 8)


    Thanks Alex.
    I don't remember the details of that post.
    Here is a slideshow of most of those scans, there might be some extras in there.
    http://s695.photobucket.com/user/Dug05/ ... ans?sort=3
    The scans are of Ektachrome 64 transparency film from the Bronica.
    Only one is cropped to straighten the horizon, but all have the cameras aspect ration.

    The scans are not a great indication of the film for colour and detail, but you do get the an impression of how shadow detail gets lost with slow transparency film when you expose to preserve bright highlights.
    A lot of people swear by Fiji transparency film for its colours. I think I got put off by their marketing examples at the time of this and did not try it first hand.
  • User avatar
    Plays with Light
    Reporter
    Reporter
    Posts: 1354
    Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 10:34 pm
    Location: Lost In Thought
    Contact:

    Re: 35mm film suggestions for landscapes, architecture and L

    by Plays with Light » Thu Jul 24, 2014 10:03 pm

    W G wrote:Here is a link to the data sheet for T-Max. Look at page 5 for long exposure info:

    http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professi ... /f4016.pdf

    Compare that with FP4+ graph on page 2:

    http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/201 ... 850702.pdf


    Woah! So I won't be trying long exposures with FP4! Thank you again,Walter! I will have to get you a bottle of single malt one day for all your assistance! :wink:
    Feedback and honest, constructive criticism is greatly appreciated.
  • W G
    Photojournalist
    Photojournalist
    Posts: 2125
    Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:25 am
    Location: Sydney
    Contact:

    Re: 35mm film suggestions for landscapes, architecture and L

    by W G » Thu Jul 24, 2014 10:04 pm

    Alex,

    No refrigeration necessary with B&W emulsions (other than chromogenic like XP-2).

    Rolls of film, pocket of camera bag, GO!
    Walter Glover

    "Photography was not a bastard left by science on the doorstep of art, but a legitimate child of the Western pictorial tradition." —Robert Galassi
  • User avatar
    Plays with Light
    Reporter
    Reporter
    Posts: 1354
    Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 10:34 pm
    Location: Lost In Thought
    Contact:

    Re: 35mm film suggestions for landscapes, architecture and L

    by Plays with Light » Thu Jul 24, 2014 10:24 pm

    Doug wrote:
    Plays with Light wrote:I was admiring some scans from film of yours earlier, in an old thread here, with images scanned for you by someone. Pure NZ beauty! 8)


    Thanks Alex.
    I don't remember the details of that post.
    Here is a slideshow of most of those scans, there might be some extras in there.
    http://s695.photobucket.com/user/Dug05/ ... ans?sort=3
    The scans are of Ektachrome 64 transparency film from the Bronica.
    Only one is cropped to straighten the horizon, but all have the cameras aspect ration.

    The scans are not a great indication of the film for colour and detail, but you do get the an impression of how shadow detail gets lost with slow transparency film when you expose to preserve bright highlights.
    A lot of people swear by Fiji transparency film for its colours. I think I got put off by their marketing examples at the time of this and did not try it first hand.


    Your post was in reply to Scotts query about scanning 120 film. I enjoyed the soft colours of the beach pictures but it was the suspension bridge that made me take a deep breath! 8)

    The loss of shadow detail is something I really want to play with on 35mm, as a first exploration of film. I have a Canon A2 on its way to me, so I can use my current lenses with it. For the course next year, I got rid of the Pentax Super ME and got a K1000 body. Thus far, I have a 50mm f/1.4 and a 28mm f/2.8 for it. Somehow, I suspect I may build a nice collection of film paraphernalia... :lol:
    Feedback and honest, constructive criticism is greatly appreciated.
  • User avatar
    Plays with Light
    Reporter
    Reporter
    Posts: 1354
    Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 10:34 pm
    Location: Lost In Thought
    Contact:

    Re: 35mm film suggestions for landscapes, architecture and L

    by Plays with Light » Thu Jul 24, 2014 10:28 pm

    W G wrote:Alex,

    No refrigeration necessary with B&W emulsions (other than chromogenic like XP-2).

    Rolls of film, pocket of camera bag, GO!


    Bugger! There's a massive jar of Tahini lurking in the back of the fridge that I've wanted to get rid of for a while now... :roll:
    Feedback and honest, constructive criticism is greatly appreciated.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests