![]() ![]() There are different developers, and all have their costs, but no matter what, it’s less expensive than mailing it out. I do appreciate having more control over the final product however, I must say that what I find the most attractive is the ability to do it on the cheap. This question generally has one of two answers: it allows for a substantial amount more control over how your photograph looks and it is much cheaper than paying someone else to develop your film for you. Lastly, and this is a big driver for many people, black and white film is considerably cheaper than color negative or slide film. In fact, because it lacks color, you can really push the boundaries of what you can and cannot do. Black and white film, as you can imagine, does not have any such issues. Similarly, color film can get quite saturated and may experience strange color shifts when it’s underexposed. That may not be as big of a deal where you live, but where I live in the Midwest, it is cloudy for several months out of the year, so black and white became my go-to until the sunny weather arrives. ![]() In addition, while the majority of C-41 and E-6 films are daylight balanced, black and white is not at all white-balanced, so you don’t have to worry about whether it’s sunny, cloudy, or anything else. Other film stocks you can pick up today, like Fujifilm Neopan Acros II and T Max P3200, are new within the last couple of years, but are based on previously discontinued film stocks, and they still have a beautiful vibe to them. Both of these examples have gone through updates to the emulsions, but at their core, they are still quite similar to their previous iterations. Similarly, the current Ilford HP5+ evolved out of its original emulsion, which made its debut in 1935. For example, Kodak Tri-X has been around since 1954. In addition, the black and white film feels transportive compared with color film stocks. The best part of all of it? Everyone has their own tastes and preferences, which really gives more opportunity for diversity. Similarly, everyone else has films that they like and those they don’t care for. Whether you prefer Ilford HP5+, Delta 100, Kodak Tri-X, T Max 100, or any other black and white film, there are so many more to choose from compared with color film stocks, and each of them has their own personality, so much so that you’ll likely find that there are stocks you like and prefer and those you don’t much care for. For those that shoot black and white, they know that it can be addictive. Yes, yes, I know: there are plenty of people who seem to exclusively shoot C-41 (color). You''d be amazed at the enhanced tonal change you''ll receive.There comes a point for every photographer who tries film when they eventually shoot black and white. It seems to me anyone who has tried this film to unsatisfactory results, simply isn''t utilitze a professional lab with a qualified printer at the helm, or needs to start rating this film properly at E.I. For architecture and landscape, and portraits, T400CN is a winner. Tri-X and Fuji Neopan 400 still tops for me. Since I prefer the added textual quality grain provides in my dad to day, and even some portrait shootings, I shoot non-chromogenics. When I want no grain, I shoot T400CN, period. You always strike a compromise somewhere with these films. It has a beautiful smooth tonal range I love, but cannot match T400CN for its overall grainless look. Since this is not the ONLY B&W film I use, I recently began shooting Fuji 100 Acros based on recent reviews. If you''re an amateur, I strongly suggest you consider this film as mini-insurance policy in tricky lighting situations. Try that with any non-chromogenic and kiss half your prints goodbye. 200 to 800 on the same roll with fantastic results. The best attribute to this film is its latitude. ![]() I know printers who disagreement with me, but all I have are my own prints for comparison. I personally prefer this chromogenic over Ilford XP2 Super, which I find doesn''t enlarge as cleanly to 8x10 and 11x14 as T400 does. Yet, I have two 4圆 prints on my wall printed from Rite-Aid on T400CN. If a pro has difficulty, you can bet a computerized mini-lab machine will be of no help. At 400 rating, I have heard complaints about how difficult (time consuming) it can be to find the right contrast range. And yes, I only use professional printers here in L.A. I almost always rate this emulsion at 200 - sometimes 100, depending on contrast variation of the scene. I have photos to 11x14 that look medium format to even the most discerning eye. I''ve shot almost every B&W emulsion over the years, and never found any to date that can rival T400CN for its latitude and lack of grain (being a dye based film). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |