r.reeder Loc: Mesa, Arizona

What kind of Argii do you use?

I, too, have developed B/W film for years. My favorite was Plus-X from the Great Yellow Father. A couple of years ago I tried some Arista.edu 120 ASA400 Ultra B/W. The film base was so flimsy that I had a hard time rolling it onto a film reel to develop. Since Kodak is defunct, I was wondering if you knew of a B/W film, both 35mm & 120, that not only had the emulsion characteristics of Plus-X, but also the handling qualities, i.e.: a Plus-X copy? Thanks.

Woodie Rick

Spelling: It is not supposed to be "notch," it is supposed to be 'niche.' I hate when that happenssss.

amehta Loc: Boston

Notch was funnier, and we knew what you meant. :-)

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

I have one friend that shoots slide film only. He's a wildlife photographer. The biggest problem he faces if that he's got to get much closer to the subject than we do with our digital cameras with the same 500mm lens. This is because we can easily just crop the image to get a close up of the subject, and he can't do that. So he must get closer! Also, he doesn't have autofocus. But since he's been doing this for many years, he has the skill to manual focus on moving subjects.

If you are shooting stills and your subjects pose for you, it may not be as tough for you to get skilled with 35mm film.

Arca

JacksonD,

I shoot film exclusively. Part of the reason for this is economic. I have about $50K wrapped up in a large format Arca Swiss camera with six Rodenstock lenses, numerous filters, one Heliopan UV filter of 112mm by was $295 alone. I have two Mamiya medium format cameras, 645AFd and RZ67, Canon F-1 and AE1, two NikonF100s, numerous lenses for both, a Retina IIIC with all three available lenses and an Olympus P and S. I cannot afford to go digital, even if I wanted to. BTW, I don't want to.

My wife and I shoot Panasonic and Canon P & S digital cameras for when we just want to 'grab a shot.' This is the kind of picture we take when we want a 4 by 6 snapshot of something, or if we want to send the picture somewhere through e-mail. I also use a digital camera to take pictures of my work, so I can put the photographs quickly into the file and/or scan them as appropriate.

Perhaps if I were beginning in the photography hobby now and spent $50K or anything near that, I would think digital. But definitely not at this stage of the game.

I have had no difficulty obtaining film of any kind from B and H and Adorama. In the Phoenix area, there are several large photographic stores which carry large and medium format film, but no more in 220, only in 120. I generally use TMAX100 and Velvia. I still have Fuji Velvia Readyloads, but am running out, so I will have to get a few 'Toyo' film holders.

If the manufacture of film were to be discontinued altogether by all companies concerned, I would return to practicing my violin.

Arca

Woodie Rick

Well, the Velvia I can see, but the T Max is not panchromatic, the yellow to red filters do not apply? Fine grain, but what about those white clouds? Did I miss something here?

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

T-Max, like nearly all modern B&W films, is panchromatic.

I believe you are thinking of orthochromatic , which preceded panchromatic and is only sensitive to green and blue. It is rarely used today but still available from Kodak, Fuji and Ilford as sheet film.

Woodie Rick

Perhaps I did get that wrong, Panchromatic/orthochromatic, but not the fact that T-Max is NOT over sensitive to the blue spectrum and under sensitive to the red spectrum. I tried fifty or more rolls of T-Max when it first came out in about 1990. I hated it, never used it again, wouldn't use it today. I'll take Plus-X or Tri-X any day or one of their old other brand equivalents, thus allowing me to use the beautiful tools of red spectrum filters---like the real black and white masters have always used. Really, no offense intended.

Woodie Rick

Correction: I had it right, the old, trusty Plus-X and Tri-X black and white films, as well as their other brand equivalents, are PANCHROMATIC FILMS. And as such, they are over-sensitive to the blue spectrum of light (they expose sky blue almost as a bright white), and they are under-sensitive to the red spectrum of light. By adding a filter of yellow, orange or red, the photographer can not only control both the color of the sky, causing the clouds to really stand out, but the same filters also render flesh tones more realistically in the black and white medium. The successful use of these filters delivers magnificent results, T-Max films cannot hold a candle to the older PANCHROMATIC films.

At the very least, I suggest that anyone shooting B&W films at least try shooting with a panchromatic film and using the filters. Yellow darkens the sky just a little, the darker yellow filter darkens the sky a lot, it is the filter I prefer, but going all the way to a red filter turns the sky almost black. Wonderful tools, with spectacular results!

My four cents on this issue.

ArgusSnap1 Loc: Indiana

r.reeder--Hi--my 1st 35mm camera was an Argus Markfinder with a Weston light meter which metered in Westons instead of ASA. My Father gave me those when he purchased a Topcon Auto 100--I was 15 at the time and now 60. I still have the camera and meter and they still work although I have not used them since college. This spring I may give it a whirl.
I love Plus X also and you can still find supplies--B&H, Adorama and other camera stores. I do like Freestyle since they have such an abundance of different supplies. Ilford (England) produces many fine quality films and will so for a long time. There are good sources for film from Eastern European countries such as the Czech Republic.

B&H carries 127 and 620 b/w as well as Super 8 movie film and some of the above in color also. And then there is Ebay --you can find lots of film there, mostly oudated but often some with just slightly out dated and still in date. I myself have never been an extreme technical geek with my film/developement so I do not mind outdated especialy with b/w and mostly have had good results.

I have not tried to dev Arista roll film but have tray dev Arista 4x5 sheet film with no problem. I am in the market nowfor a taller dorm size refridgerator to store my stockpile of film.

The film I really miss is Kodack Panotomic X 32 ASA--I used that when I was just really getting serious about photog and starting b/w. I just loved that film--no particular reason but I had a lot of fun with it.

I also do "Crappy Camera" art so outdated can be fun for that and I have some antique cameras I play around with.

You have to wonder with digital, they have all this software available to make digital look like film photography--what gives?

Woodie Rick

I'll say yes to Kodak Panatomic film! It is only ASA 32, but it was beautiful fine-grained film, lots of contrast because of the slow speed, but really neat images. Not available anymore.

wj cody Loc: springfield illinois

hello, well, yes. i use only flim - black and white and transparency materials. have my little darkroom develop my film and print my results. that is all the colour work goes to a lab for printing, as it cannot be duplicated in a home darkroom.
as for scanning, no point to it. digital darkrooms spray the print on the paper, enlarger printing impregnates the sliver halide cristals and give a 3 dimensional quality digital simply cannot achieve. so a digital print appears flat while the film print provides depth.
some paper manufacturers are attempting to replicate this with their paper surfaces, but so far, it's been less than successful.
so, there you go. i use 35mm both rangefinders and slrs, medium format and large format. lots of choices and lots of craft involved. good luck and any questions you may have, i'll be glad to assist.
go for it!!!

Photosound Loc: Dallas

I am using film, primarily B&W. There is really no sense of self-accomplishment in digital.

wj cody Loc: springfield illinois

i fully agree with you. we live in a culture of immediacy, which does nothing to assist us in contemplating our actions before consumnating them.

use of digital imaging devices robs us of the opportunity to understand our actions and negates any meaning to the imaging activity.

i often note, on this thread, folks who take hundreds of images of something, they don't even take time to understand, and then spend gods(esses) how many hours in front of a computer, hoping, somehow, somewhere, they actually have an "acceptable" image.

film provides us with the opportunity to study our subject and apply our craft when appropriate.

i'm reminded of an employee, in the IT division of our company, at the time of a new program installation. this person stated "no one told me i'd have to learn anything".

in digital imaging, i think that about sums it up.

so, from one film user to another, thank you for your post!

corryhully Loc: liverpool uk

i certainly have a preference for film for the look and the way it slows me down and makes me consider the images i may be capturing. i have set up my own darkroom and develop a lot of my films in caffenol. the is certain magic involved in watching the image appear in the tray, a magic digital is lacking in. you can also get some excellent equipment at silly prices these days (just dont tell anyone) :)