Black & White - Film Recommendation for first time mono shooter?

Sleepy

I've not been using either of my cameras much lately as I'm commuting between Ireland and the UK for work and only seeing my family at the weekends. I'm traveling light mid-week and not prepared to stuff my 450D into the bag wrapped up in shirts etc. so I've been thinking of bringing my 300v and a a 28-80 USM I picked up on ebay and getting some B&W film to pass some time in the evenings / learn about mono photography without putting my more valuable equipment at risk. Thought it might also re-ignite my interest and get me shooting again!

So - any film suggestions for a newbie?

I'll be shooting in evenings so assume I want a high ISO film, 7dayshop has Ilford HP5+ 400 - 135-24 for £2.45 a roll or the Ilford HP5+ 400 - 135-36 for £3.09 which seems like better value frame for frame...

Is that okay film to be starting with? Or would I be better off going for something like the Ilford Delta or Fuji Neopan?

Nisio

I was asking the same questions a small while back; I shot a couple of rolls of Neopan 400 and really liked it. I've picked up some rolls of HP5 now for a try.

I also used some kodak c41 black and white film that could be processed by the pharmacy mini labs ( you have to go to a propper photo shop to get neopan and HP5 developed) it worked out cheaper to get developed but there was some extra work in photoshop correcting slight colour casts.

davmigil

Sleepy wrote: »

Is that okay film to be starting with? Or would I be better off going for something like the Ilford Delta or Fuji Neopan?

HP5 is a great film to be starting with. It does give quite a grainy result, but that is part of its charm. I am not familiar with the other two films.

Paddysnapper

davmigil wrote: »

HP5 is a great film to be starting with. It does give quite a grainy result, but that is part of its charm. I am not familiar with the other two films.

I agree!:D

Morrisseeee

I'm a noob at this film malarkey aswell, and therefore I can only recommend the Fuji Neopan 400, its C41 process, ie. can be developed (printed, scanned) in any photo shop etc. I thought it was very good, but then I've not seen the others !! Note: I got it on 7dayshop aswell

DaireQuinlan

Really any of the moderate speed (400) emulsions are pretty good. There are two types, older emulsions, and more modern t-grain emulsions which have finer grain for the speed. If you're just getting up to speed ignore the difference though. My preference is for the older ones (particularly kodaks Tri-x) I think they have more character (for some completely subjective definition of the word 'character')

Delta, neopan, TMax would all be modern emulsions.

There are the C-41 B&Ws aswell. you might prefer these if you're concerned about the cost or time involved in getting the conventional B&Ws developed by a third party. Of course now is the perfect time to grab a bottle of DD-x and some fixer, a developing tank, and a thermometer, and start developing your own :-)

peter1892

Fuji Acros 100 is very nice, it has a really fine grain. I used to use it all the time before I had a dSLR and it was always my BW film of choice.

Shot these two on it:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/peter1892/472508769/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/peter1892/244926643/

DaireQuinlan

Morrisseeee wrote: »

I'm a noob at this film malarkey aswell, and therefore I can only recommend the Fuji Neopan 400, its C41 process, ie. can be developed (printed, scanned) in any photo shop etc. I thought it was very good, but then I've not seen the others !! Note: I got it on 7dayshop aswell

You're thinking of 400CN, as distinct from normal 400 which is a conventional B&W.

Sleepy

davmigil wrote: »

HP5 is a great film to be starting with. It does give quite a grainy result, but that is part of its charm. I am not familiar with the other two films.

Most of the B&W photos I love have this effect so I think that's what I'm after.

So, should I be going for the C-41 film if I don't want to pay huge development prices? Or is there a significant difference in development costs?

Sleepy

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

Of course now is the perfect time to grab a bottle of DD-x and some fixer, a developing tank, and a thermometer, and start developing your own :-)

If only it was... two small kids and an impending house-move make it something I have to save to learn about when I've a little more free-time!

duffarama

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

Really any of the moderate speed (400) emulsions are pretty good. There are two types, older emulsions, and more modern t-grain emulsions which have finer grain for the speed. If you're just getting up to speed ignore the difference though. My preference is for the older ones (particularly kodaks Tri-x) I think they have more character (for some completely subjective definition of the word 'character')

Delta, neopan, TMax would all be modern emulsions.

There are the C-41 B&Ws aswell. you might prefer these if you're concerned about the cost or time involved in getting the conventional B&Ws developed by a third party. Of course now is the perfect time to grab a bottle of DD-x and some fixer, a developing tank, and a thermometer, and start developing your own :-)

I really want to start doing some home development, but then I also want to start focussing on using the same film over and over, so that I know what to expect. Unfortunately my favourite film is a colour C41 type film!

Is tri-x available in 800 and 1600? I assume they'd all work the same so would be a good type of film to work solely with in b&w and home develop.

davmigil

Sleepy wrote: »

So, should I be going for the C-41 film if I don't want to pay huge development prices? Or is there a significant difference in development costs?

Try Gunns for pricing. Conns Cameras price list is here
I'd check Gunns prices first though!

Sleepy

Bloomin' heck that's some difference in price €17 for a 36 exposure development and print! I realise it's done by hand but ouch, that'd get expensive fast!

Can anyone recommend a fast circa 400iso C-41 B&W film that has the nice atmospheric grain davmigil was talking about?

DaireQuinlan

Sleepy wrote: »

Bloomin' heck that's some difference in price €17 for a 36 exposure development and print! I realise it's done by hand but ouch, that'd get expensive fast!

Can anyone recommend a fast circa 400iso C-41 B&W film that has the nice atmospheric grain davmigil was talking about?

welll, c-41 B&W tends to have a different look. I took a bunch of photos of my kid a couple of years back with Ilford XP2 which is ilfords C-41 B&W. It doesn't look -too- bad.

Eirebear

Fired off a few rolls of FP4 this morning, havnt shot any film in about 10 years so who knows how it will turn out.
Its not cheap this film lark though is it? Bloody paper for college is setting me back a fortune!

Effects

I really like Neopan 400, wasn't too happy with HP5 but might give it another try. It's easy enough to develop yourself, not that expensive to buy what you need and will save you a fortune.

Sleepy

I've just placed an order for a roll each of the Ilford XP2 Super 400 and Fuji Neopan 400CN as I'll be able to get these developed more easily with my current schedule.

Thanks to all for their input, I'll post my opinion of each when I've got the photos back.

BTW - Daire, I actually like the grain on that shot...

i_am_dogboy

If you're willing to buy online, or can actually find any of it in a real world shop, fomapan 400 gives good results, cheap too. It looks similar enough to tri-x to me, but higher contrast. Efke make some nice films too, but I've only shot efke 100.

I stick almost exclusively to tri-x myself these days though, gives very consistent results with rodinal, and it's particularly easy to clean, which really helps if you scan or print yourself.

DaireQuinlan

i_am_dogboy wrote: »

I stick almost exclusively to tri-x myself these days though, gives very consistent results with rodinal, and it's particularly easy to clean, which really helps if you scan or print yourself.

Or tri-x in Diafine. Ooooooo.

i_am_dogboy

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

Or tri-x in Diafine. Ooooooo.

I've never actually tried diafine, I might have to stick it on my next freestyle order. What kind of speed do you get from tri-x with it? The way some people go on about it I was expecting the results to be just awful, but the shot you posted, and a quick glance at the flickr group don't disappoint. Definitely seems to be a good alternative to shooting at 400 and hoping I didn't blur at slower shutter speeds when it gets dark.

DaireQuinlan

i_am_dogboy wrote: »

I've never actually tried diafine, I might have to stick it on my next freestyle order. What kind of speed do you get from tri-x with it? The way some people go on about it I was expecting the results to be just awful, but the shot you posted, and a quick glance at the flickr group don't disappoint. Definitely seems to be a good alternative to shooting at 400 and hoping I didn't blur at slower shutter speeds when it gets dark.

I rate it at anything from 800->1250 or so depending. Great tones from it. I had to get it from macodirect though, can't remember why. Either freestyle didn't have it in stock or they don't send chems to Ireland or something. Although actually I've never emailed them to ask, it just states it on their faq so they might do.

i_am_dogboy

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

I rate it at anything from 800->1250 or so depending. Great tones from it. I had to get it from macodirect though, can't remember why. Either freestyle didn't have it in stock or they don't send chems to Ireland or something. Although actually I've never emailed them to ask, it just states it on their faq so they might do.

Some chemicals are ground shipping only, I know you can't get colour kits from them, could be weight related or something.

This macodirect place looks decent too, 20 rolls of tri-x for 60 euro right now.

sineadw

AFAI understand it c41 b&w doesn't have the same tonal range as 'real' b&w. That's another thing you need to keep in mind. I tend to steer clear of it for exactly the reason you're drawn to it - ease and expense of development. If you're doing it yourself then real b&w film is waaaaaaaay cheaper and a good bit easier too. And it's great fun and easy to do. You should try it!

HP5 is lovely for greys. Delta I find a bit more contrasty. Another option for you is to push your film. I've been pushing fomapan 200 to 400 (and then accidentally developing for 800 ) and I love it

Sleepy

I'll be moving house in a little under 2 months so an attic / garage where I can develop film is starting to become a factor in choosing our next place!

Effects

Sleepy wrote: »

I'll be moving house in a little under 2 months so an attic / garage where I can develop film is starting to become a factor in choosing our next place!

You don't need any extra space to develop your own film. I take mine out of the canister in the bathroom at night, as it has no windows. Once it's in the developing tank you don't have to worry about the light and I do the rest by the kitchen sink.

sineadw

A heavy black plastic bag will do. Or folding a jacket. It's only getting it out of the canister and onto the roll thingey that you need to worry about (although I still get jitters, and my kids are *bound* to burst in, which is why I prefer a locked darkroom..). I really think it's only if you're printing that you need a decent room though.

Sleepy

Film and a case for my camera arrived in my house today

But I'm in Guildford

Really pleased with the case I got, a Samsonite case for a single (d)SLR and lens for £8 rather than £28! I'm travelling hand-luggage only and can't fit the slingshot into my flight bag along with all the work clothes etc. so thought this might give the camera a bit more protection in there than just wrapping it up in my jeans!

Bargain! http://www.7dayshop.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=777_1&products_id=101524

Simplicius

goto www.filmdev.org to see pictures of different film & developer combinations. It will also give you development times associated with look you like ....

http://www.filmdev.org