dje
Dear black-and-white community,
I’ve just fallen victim to the overwhelming range of black-and-white film on offer. Suddenly, brand names are popping up that I’d long since written off. It’s leaving me at a loss...
Foma – that’s a name I’ve heard of
Ilford – right, didn’t they want to stop making it?
Kodak – to what extent is this still the old Tri-X??
Agfa APX400 – used to be my standard film, where are the new ones coming from now??
Then I read about SCALA film reappearing??
Rollei – I’ve tried it, but I’m not convinced – especially as the range is confusing
ADOX – I only know it in the green packaging as EFKE; I think I’ve still got some frozen away.
Bergger Panchro 400 – very interesting film, but how much longer will it be available...
FOTOIMPEX was kind enough to send me a ‘newsletter’ last week – they’ve apparently been re-contacting dormant accounts, which motivated me to get back into analogue black-and-white photography. The range of films seems to be wider today than it was in the 1980s and 90s, or is it all the same stuff?
Whilst Ilford and Foma still offer what was in their range back then – albeit updated – I wonder where all these new emulsions are coming from, given that ten years ago the manufacturers were closing down one after the other.
I get the impression that renowned brand names are being bought up everywhere and then sold on at a profit. Much like Grundig, Telefunken and Wega, which suddenly turn up as brand names in the super-cheap range.
The range here goes from ‘Superpan’ to ‘Retropan’ and ‘DAR-something-or-other’ to ‘SilberSUPERPOWER’. They’re all super-sharp and reproduce the optimal grey scale – :@
I’m looking for a classic 400 film that I can use for exposure from 200–800 ASA with good results (the development will be adjusted). My standard combination a long time ago was AP/X400 or Tri-X in Rodinal, sometimes with exposure settings of 200/400 or 800, as 120 and 35mm film. I also liked using the Fuji NP400 – it was brilliant in Rodinal!!
I never really warmed to Tmax or Deltas. Years ago, I tried a fresh start with Rollei Retro or RPX, but wasn’t satisfied. So, to cut a long story short... who can recommend a combination that gives me flexibility on the go – without me having to try out an estimated 25 different emulsions?
The simplest answer would of course be: ‘Just use the current APX or Tri-X and stop bothering us’, but sorry!!
There’s no AGFA left in APX and Rodinal (Adonal or R09?) these days – besides, I can’t find APX in 120 format.
Hoping for some understanding and a couple of good tips – Regards, Dirk
landpfarrer
Hi Dirk,
Just a few quick tips that I hope will be of help to you:
Foma: they’re still churning them out. I’ve just used Fomapan 200 for the first time, as I needed an affordable film in 24-exposure packs for a school project. Not bad at all, good grey tones – using the Foma developer, it was worth it for 11 rolls. But it probably wouldn’t be my go-to choice. I haven’t tried the 400 yet.
Ilford: They’re churning them out too. For other brands as well. Rollei RPX 100/400, Apfaphoto APX 100/400, Kentmere 100/400 and FOTOIMPEX’s CHM 100/400 are all produced by Ilford and are said to use the same emulsion. The Kentmere / CHM 400 develops well in Adonal/Rodinal, with quite pronounced contrasts. Adonal/Rodinal or all the other R09s on the market all use (more or less) the old Agfa Rodinal formula.
I’ve tried the HP5+; I didn’t really like it in Rodinal and Ultrafin – the contrasts were very strong.
Bergger Panchro 400 – the 135 format is no longer available, but the 120 format is still on sale; your question about how much longer it will be available is a fair one. It’s a bit tricky to handle; you definitely need to rinse it before developing, otherwise it becomes too dense.
Adox: In-house production, in Berlin and Switzerland; an old brand name but not just used as a label (have a look at adox.de). Unfortunately, their in-house production only covers low-speed films. I’m waiting impatiently for the CHS 100 II. But even that won’t cover the range you’re looking for. In the low-speed range, I tend to go for Adox films.
Kodak: That’s my current combination: Tri-X with HC 110. It covers quite a wide range. Kodak made a few changes to it around 2005 (probably due to production changes and raw materials), including adjusting the development times (the data sheet specifies 3.75 minutes for HC 110, which is generally considered too short; I use 5.5 minutes). But on the whole, it’s a tried-and-tested film.
Just my humble opinion, which makes no claim to universal validity ;-)
Kind regards, Jörg
Photux
So I can’t really quite understand all the fuss. There have already been plenty of useful tips on @landpfarrer. Personally, I’ve been a Tri-X fan for years and I also think this is pretty much the last film Kodak will be taking off the market, so supply is guaranteed. I’ve never pushed it myself, but pushing it up to 1600 in D76 works without any problems. I wouldn’t go quite that far with Rodinal/R09; at 400, it produces very, very nice results in R09 1+50.
On the subject of developers: Rodinal based on the latest AGFA formula is available from the forum’s host, whilst the ‘original Rodinal’ (called R09 or something similar), based on the now widely known formula from 100 years ago, is available from various other suppliers. Personally, I prefer the latter slightly because of the greater sharpness; the higher granularity doesn’t bother me. Rodinal (whichever of the two versions) is unlikely to disappear from the market any time soon. And if it did, you could always make it yourself if necessary...
I have never personally tested developers other than D76 or Rodinal in any detail, because I have a low throughput and therefore need long shelf lives (with Rodinal virtually forever, with D76 a year is easily possible). Both also have the advantage of delivering at least good results with pretty much any film. Even with flat-crystal films, although I don’t really like those myself either.
The Ilford HP5 is certainly on a par with the Tri-X and is likely to remain on the market for a long time to come; which of the two you prefer is ultimately a matter of personal taste.
If you’re looking for something a bit cheaper, I also find the Kentmere/CHM 400 really lovely and, above all, with a very fine grain and certainly pushable. With everything Ilford produces for other labels, however, the question always remains as to how long it will stay on the market in exactly this form and whether it is really 100% identical. It’s also conceivable that the emulsions are slightly adapted to the wishes of the respective customer, though it’s hard to say for sure.
dje
Thanks for the feedback,
Tri-X is an old favourite – I just had the problem years ago that the old negatives were difficult to scan. These days, I suppose I should develop the Tri-X a bit softer.
After a bit of searching online, I read that even ‘Ferrania’ has brought its P30 back onto the market following a ‘successfully completed ambitious campaign’ – albeit in limited quantities. Will we soon be seeing films from ‘Perutz’ and ‘Tura’ again? – I wouldn’t be surprised if they also bore the ‘Made in Germany’ label; as seen on the Rollei R3. In the US, the “Ultrafine-Extreme” is currently being hyped – though no one knows exactly where it actually comes from – but it seems to be a slimmed-down version of Delta (presumably).
Another example is the “JCH StreetPan 400”, which is suddenly being hailed as the reincarnation of Neopan.
JCH StreetPan 400 is Surveillance Film Reborn for Street Photographers – JCH StreetPan 400 doesn’t use a newly invented emulsion — it’s actually an old discontinued surveillance film that Hunt is bringing back to life. (It’s “re-born film,” Hunt says, “not re-spooled film”).
Everyone does what they want, I suppose....
I suppose I’ll just stick with Tri-X again. I’d actually thought that somewhere in the new flood of films there might be one with the potential to knock Tri-X off its pedestal for my needs.
Best regards and thanks, Dirk
P.S.: If anyone finds a fresh “TURA pan 160” before I do, please let me know.
Wolf_XL
… I’ve partly ended up back where I was back in the eighties… In the ISO 100 range with Ilford FP4 or PanF – it’s only in the ISO 400 range that, after a long period of trying out other options, I’ve settled on a flat-crystal film – the TMax 400. But I also enjoy using HP5 from time to time. When it comes to developers, I’ve stuck with the tried and tested – D-76, HC-110 and TMax developer are my go-to formulas. Normally, Rodinal would also feature on the list – but unfortunately, there are far too many Rodinals on the market here, all claiming to be the original. But to be honest, I can’t be bothered to investigate which one is closest to the original – so I’ve now dropped Rodinal from my list...
I’ve never really warmed to Foma films, though. That was mainly because none of the Fomas ever achieved the stated speed in the solutions I used – not even in Foma developers...
