# School me on 35mm film you guys..



## sincere (May 17, 2006)

i see so many different films outthere that i dont even know what to look into. I already used the search engine and didnt really find such thread. maybe we can make it a sticky for rookies. Thanks!


----------



## bigfatbadger (May 17, 2006)

Black and white or colour?


----------



## sincere (May 17, 2006)

both really..


----------



## DocFrankenstein (May 17, 2006)

sincere said:
			
		

> both really..


School starts in september... and it's a 3 year program. 

Film is better if you control every step of the way


----------



## Alpha (May 17, 2006)

Beginners black and white films: Ilford Delta, Kodak Tmax
Contrasty b&w: Ilford PanF, Fuji Acros, Fomapan, Plus-x & Tri-x, Agfapan
Saturated color film (slide): Fuji Velvia, Kodak E-series
Natural color slide film: Fuji Provia and Astia, Kodak NC (stands for "natural color")
Saturated color print film: Kodak VC ("vivid color"), I can't remember what the fuji equivalent is.
Natural color print film: mostly portait films, like Fuji NPH and Kodak Portra

Best high speed b&w film: Ilford Delta series
Best slow speed b&w film: Hard to find: Tech Pan, Easy to find: Maco UP25


----------



## DocFrankenstein (May 17, 2006)

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


----------



## bigfatbadger (May 17, 2006)

@MaxBloom - what's the difference between a beginners film and not? More exposure latitude or something?


----------



## KevinR (May 17, 2006)

I would have put the Tri-X as a beginner B&W 

Ilford Delta does not have a whole lot of exposure latitude
Same with TMax


----------



## sincere (May 17, 2006)

MaxBloom said:
			
		

> Beginners black and white films: Ilford Delta, Kodak Tmax
> Contrasty b&w: Ilford PanF, Fuji Acros, Fomapan, Plus-x & Tri-x, Agfapan
> Saturated color film (slide): Fuji Velvia, Kodak E-series
> Natural color slide film: Fuji Provia and Astia, Kodak NC (stands for "natural color")
> ...



What are contrasty b/w films? And what are saturated color films or slide? i always used the regular film so i dont really know much..bare with me..


----------



## sincere (May 17, 2006)

and whassup with the speed?


----------



## KevinR (May 17, 2006)

Higher contrast will give you deeper blacks and whiter whites. Not as much gray in between.

Saturation refers to the boldness of the color rendition.

The speed refers to the sensitivity of light. Higher iso number means it is more sensitive. You can shoot in lower light, or higher shutter speeds.


----------



## 2framesbelowzero (May 17, 2006)

Nice...I was going to put this link up on the forum a few days ago and now you have created a good place to do this.


http://www.ephotozine.com/equipment/buyersguide/fullbuyersguide.cfm?buyersguideid=8

(regarding various black & white film types)




			
				sincere said:
			
		

> i see so many different films outthere that i dont even know what to look into. I already used the search engine and didnt really find such thread. maybe we can make it a sticky for rookies. Thanks!


----------



## DocFrankenstein (May 17, 2006)

2framesbelowzero said:
			
		

> http://www.ephotozine.com/equipment/buyersguide/fullbuyersguide.cfm?buyersguideid=8


Just keep in mind that Agfa's gone


----------



## JamesD (May 17, 2006)

There are four basic types of film which are commonly used.  They are black and white, chromogenic black and white, color negative, and color slide.

Color negative and chromogenic black and white films are essentially the same thing, except that the black and white film doesn't record color information.  What this means to you is that they can both be processed at just about any one-hour photo procesor in the world (it's called process C-41).

Regular black and white film requires different chemicals, and is much easier to process yourself at home.  It can be done at room temperature in a hand-held "daylight tank."  As far as I know, there's no specific process name.  There are lots of different developers you can use, however, and each produces a somewhat different result in the final image.

Color slide film does not produce a negative.  It produces a positive image ready for viewing (with a slide projector, or a light table and a magnifier).  It requires yet another chemical process (called E-6).

I'm really only familiar with Kodak films, which I use almost all the time.  Each type of film has a different set of characteristics, making it suitable for different situations.  Someone else will have to put up some information about Fuji and other brands of film... I just don't know enough about them to comment.

Some regular black and white films:
TMax 100, TMax 400, TMax P3200,  Tri-X, Plus-X (the most commonly used Kodak varieties).  Each has it's own grain and contrast characteristics, and some people swear by one or another.  If you're just starting out, they're all pretty much similar, although the contrast varies a bit.  If you're printing your own, using graded or variable-contrast paper allows you to control the final print contrast.  TMaxP3200 is a very high-speed film with lots of very visible grain.

Chromogenic BW film:
BW400CN. I think it's the only one currently in production, but I could be wrong.  I don't use chromogenic BW film much, and this is the only one I ever see, so it's the only one I use.  In any case, you can always tell a roll of this type of film apart from regular BW by the notice on the package (and usually the roll): "Process C-41 Only" or something similar.

Color Negative film:
The entire Portra family of films.  The Portra NC films have natural-looking colors, while the VC films have boosted color saturation, meaning that the colors are very vivid (this is sometimes considered bad for portrature, because it can make flesh look ruddy or flushed).
100UC and 400UC, both of which are high-saturation films (and my personal favorites for what little color work I do).
The family of yellow-box "consumer" films, which come in 100, 200, 400, and 800 speed.  They're kinda bland, but pretty cheap.
High Definition film.  I'm not sure about this one, I've never used it, but I've seen it around.  I believe it comes in 200 and 400 speeds, but I only ever see the 400 version.

Color Slide film:
Anything with "chrome" in the name.  Ektachrome, Kodachrome, Elite Chrome, etc.  I've only ever shot one roll of slide film, so I can't tell you much about them other than the exposure is fairly critical to getting a good image. You can get prints made with slide film, but the basic developing package typically only gets you mounted slides.

In general, the faster the film speed, the more grainy the image will be, which is important when making enlargements beyond 4X6.  Grain is kind of like the resolution of a computer monitor... it limits the amount of detail recorded in the image, and affects the sharpness.

If you're like me, you'll probably wind up with just a couple films you use most of the time.  For me, it's TMax 100 & 400, and 100UC & 400UC for color.  For low-light, I use Kodak's 800 yellow-box film (very rare) or push-process TMax400 (a subject entirely unto itself, but much more common for me).  Truth is, unless you really get into it, you probably won't notice many huge differences across brands and varieties within a brand. They're there, and to the very observent, they're quite apparent... but to the casual observer, they usually aren't, unless you hold the same scene shot with two different films at the same time.

If you're one of the observant types, this is a subject that could go on for days... but I think that this covers most of the basics.  I'm sure someone will fill any holes I've left, and correct anything I've said which isn't quite right (or is dead wrong).  Also, like I said, i can't really comment on non-kodak brands, simply because I don't use them (although I've got a box of Fuji 800 sitting here to try).

Probably the best way to tell what the differences are is to buy a roll of each film and try it.  That's what I did, and what I'm still doing today.

Hope that helps


----------



## Torus34 (May 18, 2006)

I do not separate films into 'beginner' and 'expert' categories.  I have no idea of the criteria which might apply nor their applicability.

I use Pan F and Tri X in 35mm and Plus X and Tri X in 120.  They have proven satisfactory for many years.


----------



## ThomThomsk (May 18, 2006)

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 (May 18, 2006)

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 (May 18, 2006)

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 (May 18, 2006)

sincere said:
			
		

> 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 (May 18, 2006)

sincere said:
			
		

> 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 (May 18, 2006)

DocFrankenstein said:
			
		

> 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 (Jun 12, 2006)

ThomThomsk said:
			
		

> 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.





			
				Jeff Canes said:
			
		

> 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 (Jun 12, 2006)

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.


----------

