Hi Richard,
The compilation of snippets I included at the end, answering your question
5, constitutes really good advice about B&W film and the joys of
'DIY'. Well put, guys!
If you really are going to try the DIY road, which I wholeheartedly
recommend, I, as a relative beginner in this game, would like to recommend
Tri-X as the easiest film to work with, beside all the other good qualities
mentioned here. However, if you like it contrasty and sharp I think Ilford
HP5 Plus is a 'must try' as well. It is also very pushable.
One point to remember is to pair the film with a suitable developer. For
Tri-X my suggestion is D-76 - a classic combination. For HP5+ I'd like to
suggest the not-so-obvious Agfa Rodinal, which is cheap and easy to mix,
and the combination gives contrasty, sharp, and gritty pictures.
Of course, if you don't like grain, T-Max 100 developed in T-Max developer
may be a better way to go. And, to complicate things a little more, my
absolute favourite is Afga APX 100 developed in Rodinal, for its wonderful
tonality and sharpness.
It would be interesting to hear more about this topic from other B&W
shooters out there. A moderate guess would be that there are at least
twice as many recommendations for film/dev combinations as there are
photographers.
-poo
At 05:14 2003-04-29, John A. Lind wrote:
At 15:16 4/28/03, Richard Smith wrote:
5. I am drawn to stark, contrasty, sharp black and white photos. What
film should I use, Tri-X or Tmax?6. The Photoworks lab does OK with
color, but doesn t develop and scan black and white film. Is there
someone around who does this well and for a reasonable price?
Tri-X is noted for its comparatively wide latitude (in addition to good
mid-tones, an interesting grain that isn't "harsh," and tolerates being
"pushed"). Wide latitude = lower contrast . . . on the negative. IIRC,
TMax has a narrower latitude and will create greater contrast on the
negative. Note that even if you have a lower contrast negative, contrast
grade selection for print material can crank up the contrast. Check out
pricing for "real" B&W prints from full service pro labs near you.
At 03:55 2003-04-29, Lama-Jim L'Hommedieu wrote:
2. If you want to do "stark, contrasty, sharp black and white photos",
you're not gonna get them from a drugstore. This is the
exclusive province of people who know what they're doing. That means
doing it yourself. There are two ways to go:
a.) Take a Black and White photo course at a college, or
b.) Get the right software to allow full control of editing photos at home
and an inkjet printer. I've done color from my PC but
not B&W. I suspect that printing B&W on an inkjet will be unrewarding.
Back to a.) Making a really, really nice B&W photographic print is very
gratifying somehow. Done well and shown in lots of light,
the different tones seem to glow from behind the plane of the paper. I
know it sounds absurd but consider this: there is no
drugstore in the world that is going to print your photo over and over
again, for 3 hours, until it is perfect. When you get out of
the darkroom and have THAT to show for the time, paradoxically, the time
doesn't matter. There's a badge-of-courage to saying,
"Thanks, it took 2 hours to get the shadow detail right."
Printing B&W is very timeconsuming, smelly, and takes lots of space. If
you've ever seen a real B&W print, though, you may find
that none of this matters.
To paraphrase one of the masters, great photos are not *taken*, they're
*made* in the darkroom. If you really want to make "stark,
contrasty, sharp black and white photos", it doesn't matter if you use a
T20 or a T32. You need to do the darkroom experience.
At 00:54 2003-04-29, Fernando Gonzalez Gentile wrote:
>5. I am drawn to stark, contrasty, sharp black and white photos. What
film should I use, Tri-X or Tmax? Or maybe something else?
IMHO, pushing Tri-X to 800 or 1600 and/or using a red filter.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|