Overall, it’s one of our favorites and we recommend it for beginners and pros alike. It’s a very forgiving film, too, and we have to warn you that it will make you want to go back out and shoot more.
From color to black-and-white, 35mm to medium and large format, renowned professional photographers select the films they love. They tell us why and expand on the effects those films have had on their looks and their processes in their careers.
Traditionally, you’d want fine grain. Fine grain should give you smoother tonal transitions as well has having finer grain 🙂 Low ISO film and/or larger format. If you are stuck with 35mm, I’d pick one of the fine grained B&W films. PanF+, Delta 100, T-Max 100, FP4+, Plus-X, or Acros. PanF+, FP4+, and Plus-X are traditional films, with more grain than the others for a given speed. I wouldn’t be surprised if PanF+ has more grain than T-Max 100. PanF+ is more contrasty, by which I mean it reproduces a smaller amount of scene dynamic range than the others. T-Max 400 has surprising fine grain for it’s speed and is probably as fine grained as the 100 speed traditional films (Plus-X, FP4+).Personally, you’ll get the most ‘traditionally’ pleasing portraits at 4×5 or MF. In 4×5, the format is large enough that a film like T-Max 400 or Tri-X would be fine. In MF, they would also work, but you might get nicer tonal variations with the slower films. In 35mm, I’d stick with one of the slower films unless you want more grain.It’s a lot of choices. Pick traditional or tabular grain and your speed. They should all make fine portrait films. So, just throwing one out there, Plus-X. 97 months ago (permalink)
My goal is to change the ISF banner every month with a member’s image. If I chan…
Sign up for a free account, or sign in (if you’re already a member).
I have shot portraits on Acros and Delta 100. Granted they were in 4×5 and 8×10 which is not what you are doing. I prefer natural lighting outdoors for portraits. I meter on the skin and the darkest clothing and go from there.I wouldn’t worry over much about it. Some of your shots will be brilliant and some not. Most will be average, because that’s how it goes in this game. It’s not like you have just the one chance.Lastly, I would suggest you choose one film and stick to it. It really helps to know a film well because you can grow to trust it and predict outcomes better. I used t-Max 100 exclusively when my kids were growing up and I got consistent (not always good, mind) results. 97 months ago (permalink)
[blockquote]BTW, green filters are sometimes used for portraits. Most skin blemishes are red-toned so they disappear with the use of a filter that blocks red light. I’ve yet to try that myself though, so I can’t vouch for it from personal experience. [/blockquote] If you block red light, it shows up as black. Since your subjects have white skin, this will make them look MORE pockmarked, not less. If you want smooth skin, try an orange or red filter, and possibly some near IR film like SFX, although if you go too far in this direction, you can end up with somewhat ghostly images with translucent skin. 97 months ago (permalink)
I’ll try and be clear with this as i tend to ramble.Recently i’ve wanted to do a series of formal-ish portraits of my family on black and white film, maybe colour later, but B&W for this topic. I did search the archive but couldn’t find a topic on this. Is there a better B&W film for shooting skin tones and details? (white or tanned white skin in my families case). Are B&W films basically the same when it comes to this, or do some expose skin better? Also do some films work better with flash shots? Is there a better background as well, plain or textured for contrast with skin on B&W shots.I have plenty of 35mm cameras (I’d probably use my pentax me super with smc 50mm/1.7) so I’m leaning towards using that for this project but the 2 rolls of T-Max 400 i’ve shot recently in 35mm, i wasn’t impressed with how skin tones came out. I also have a Kershaw 450 (6×6 folder) with a roll of Neopan 400 in it at the moment i’ve been waiting to test so i might do some less formal shots to see how it goes with that as well. Though i was worried how easy it would be to get a series of large prints done from 6×6, suppose i could do some high res scans and print from digital files, that seems to defeat the point, though i doubt the family would notice any difference.I prefer the look of B&W for shooting people (from what i’ve done with digital anyway) and i want it on film for longevity as well. I recently went through the old family negative archive and scanned them, and was pleasantly surprised how well they scan after many decades. What are my digital shots going to be in 50 years, lost to time and digital rot, no physical visible backup. I suppose this might be a weird reason but i like the idea of having a long lasting backup of my current family, a bit sentimental i guess.I hope that makes some sense. Originally posted at 6:19AM, 7 August 2010 PDT (permalink) Akairom edited this topic 97 months ago.
Does anybody have any examples of this? I’ve read bits and pieces scattered t…
Nicholas Nixon has it down to a science. He has shot most of his work on 8×10 but in his quest for perfection now uses an even larger 11×14 cameras. For him it’s not only the film but how it is shot and processed.
Dang it … a full CLA for £40? Where did you get that? Here in London they charge a minimum of £60.Anyway … Delta 100 is my personal favorite. I absolutely love it souped with D-76. I think for a portrait series I’d use that, scrap flash and go with continuous lighting. 97 months ago (permalink)
Jocelyn Bain Hogg dives into his stories and sticks with them. His project The Firm, which has matured into The Family, follows the British organized underground crime world. He began the project in 1998 when film was the only option. He has chosen to stick with the medium to keep his photographs visually consistent but his love for the film started when he was 14. “It’s one of those habits,” he tells TIME. “I prefer it to the HP5. You have to think how you’re going to solve a puzzle. There’s something to be said about that learning curve. To have to work harder.”
OK Here is the place to put all your fine photos and gear I am going to make th…
DX barcode numbers on 135 film (please contribute) 148 replies
Film–the beauty of it has inspired apps like Instagram and loads of profiles that digital photographers think can be easily adapted to mimic the look of the celluloid and chemical reaction’s results. You can probably say this about color photography, but there is no way it can be said about black and white. For what it’s worth, black and white film looks beautiful and is much more organic than most results that you’d get from a digital camera.
I’d suggest Delta 400, it’s got an extended red sensitivity that does well for Caucasian skin tones and is very fine grained. You can combine it with filters of course.What gear depends on what look you’re going for. I do most of my portraiture with Medium Format, preferably a more modern SLR with a lens between 80 and 150mm. 97 months ago (permalink)
Surprisingly, he gives an unexpected argument for film: It’s archival. “The one thing we all forget is that film does last. We don’t know with technology how it’s going to change. We continually update our hard drives because technology says we need to but a roll of film is a roll of film, is a roll of film.”
Everyone shoots with Tri-X: beginners, pros, enthusiasts, etc. It’s by far the most famous black and white film out there. You’ll like it to start, but once you experiment with others you’ll probably have your heart stolen by those.
Delta 100, 400 and Tri-X; simple background and at least 1 bulb. 97 months ago (permalink)
I’m getting ready to develop some PanF+ in Kodak d-76 1:1. I’ve done this befor…
“Tri-X Professional 320 ISO rating, but I cut it in half because it makes the shadows richer. Steiglitz and Weston did it. Keep the highlights down and boost the shadows. Overexpose by one stop, under developing by 20%.”
Get the latest deals, reviews and recommendations from the editors of TIME: sign up for The Goods newsletter here
No, I wasn’t really suggesting you run out to get a new camera just for this. Just what I would use, with the stuff I already have, as an example of the kind of thing I’d aim for.But again, you don’t need high sensitivity so you’re best off using a low-iso, low grain film. Which one is best is of course up to you. I’ve yet to try Pan F so I have no comment on it, but many people do love it while cautioning that it is fairly high contrast. I think you’re right in going for 35mm as that’s the format you seem most comfortable with and that you have the best gear for. If time is not pressing, how about this:Try out two or three different light setups beforehand. One fairly neutral, one a bit more contrasty, and one really dark and Rembrandty. Then shoot one roll of each film you’re interested in trying, using a volunteer/suffering relative, with each lighting setup. Develop and scan or get small prints done, then pick the film and the lighting setup you want to use from that.BTW, green filters are sometimes used for portraits. Most skin blemishes are red-toned so they disappear with the use of a filter that blocks red light. I’ve yet to try that myself though, so I can’t vouch for it from personal experience. 97 months ago (permalink)
My personal favourite?Adox CHS 25 ART or the Efke 25 (they are the same film) in HC-110 Solution H: 97 months ago (permalink)
As a guess you’ll want a fairly fine-grained film, and not push it (you probably don’t want black shadows in every wrinkle and pockmark-like grain specks on their faces if you want to stay on speaking terms with them). And if you’re doing flash shots you have no real problem with film speed in any case. So, something like Delta 100 should be OK, or perhaps Acros (though I prefer Delta 100 – here’s a few impressions: janneinosaka.blogspot.com/2010/07/delta-100.html).I’m sure you’re already aware that the setup of the lighting is probably going to be more critical for the look of the final result than the choice of film.Also, while I would normally go for medium format (less grain, better tonality) I’d probably give an old folder a rest in this case. A 35mm camera with a good, modern lens is probably giving you cleaner, more neutral results. Of course, you may well want to aim for a retro look, in which case the folder could be just what you wanted.If it was me, I’d use Delta 100 in my Pentax 67, then print from that. 97 months ago (permalink)
But be very careful of lighting as it is easy to get very high contrast results. Especially when using a flash. Something that might be more suited for your needs and would make a flash unnecessary would be HP5+.
Shoot it in 6×6 and the grain won’t be an issue. Plus its fairly low contrast and should give you nice subtle skin tones in varying light conditions. I don’t have any examples of portraiture with it in my stream, but I have had very good results in the past.
97 months ago (permalink) exultant action [deleted] says:
He points out that the developer used to process the film and the paper it is printed on is as important to the look of a photograph as the film itself. Winters processed the film for the image above in Rodinol developer and printed it on Ilford Multigrade Fiber Based, Warmtone Gelatin Silver Paper. “That would be the combo that I would say would warm my heart.”
I dig the Delta films. And I am sure you know the benefits of medium format film.I think your folder might actually work better because the lens has a lower contrast due to either being single coated or uncoated. This could work very well depending on what you want for your project. I also like how anastigmat lenses render people. Does it have X-Sync?If using flash probably a 200 or 400 speed film. 97 months ago (permalink)
Every photograph has his own favorite setup! But how do you present this project? The best detail in your photographs will be with a 4×5 or bigger negative and i think the aspect ratio for portrait is 4×5/6×7(they are the same).I happen to like Tri-X 320 and this film only is for medium and large format camera’s, but your miles may vary! Try to think of the type of film you want to use and do a search on Flickr, to see how different skin tones react on that film. 97 months ago (permalink)
More so than any other film on this list, Ilford Delta 400 will inspire you with its gorgeous looks.
Yeah i’ve been thinking about not using the flash, but i’m going to do a load of tests with and without flash to see which i prefer anyway. For the record, i’m not developing these myself, i’ve found local lab that can do them properly for a decent price, in under a week as well, he also does E6 dev twice a week, gives me a good incentive to use up the medium format Velvia 50 i’ve got.The guy i get mine repaired by is www.aztechservices.com/ he does do camera repair by post but he lives about 7-8 miles from me so i just drive there. The prices on his site are a guideline, he said the cost can vary depending on parts needed and the difficulty of the repair. He’s also fixing my King Regula Cita (CLA with rangefinder repair) and said it will only cost £25. 97 months ago (permalink)
Something I forgot. With respect to a digital file of the image, there are two choices – scan negative or scan print.When I first starting pushing images up to the internet, it never occurred to me to scan a “finished” traditional B&W print.In “traditional B&W photography”, the film is developed to produce the negative. Then later, to print, light is projected through the negative onto a photographic paper, and then the photographic paper is developed by immersion in liquids. Sometimes called a “wet print”.The “hand printing” usually refers to the printer varying the time the light falls onto the photographic paper. At this step, the printer can vary the light falling on different areas of the image projected onto the paper. In your photo editor on your computer, there are “dodge” and “burn” tools. these are terms from “hand printing”. Hope that helps.Take your time. It’s interesting. Brian Originally posted 97 months ago. (permalink) dried_squid edited this topic 97 months ago.
I don’t really have the space, money or inclination to purchase a medium format slr setup like the pentax or a large format system but i appreciate the advice anyway.This is the personal project of mine, not really for showing off as it were. I was planning to make a set of larger prints, 8×12″ and whatever the equivalent for 6×6 would be. 35mm would probably be best for this it seems. The folder probably doesn’t have the best lens in the world but i’ve seen good portraits from home made pinholes so i wasn’t overly worried about a vintage look or a modern crisp look so long as the exposure was “correct”.My original point was really if there was any film better suited to the task, i’ve been hearing good things about Ilford films but there are quite a few to chose from so i didn’t know what to pick really, though recent article on Pan F+ seems to suggest it has the tonality I’d be looking for. But not having shot a lot of black and white i figured i could be wrong in this assertion and that any lower iso B&W would produce similar results, like the Delta 100 you mention. 97 months ago (permalink)
Magnum photographer Stuart Franklin still shoots a ton of film. “I have done more assignments on film in the last year than I have on digital by a factor of about three.”
The best of the bunch was Agfa APX 25 but now that’s deceased I would opt either for Pan F or XP2. 97 months ago (permalink)
Morinaka:Anastigmat lenses usually have a simple triplet formula en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lens_triplet.svgYou can tell if it is coated if you see a slight color change in the light (perhaps pinkish or amber).80mm is a great focal range which is technically more “normal” than a 50mm on a 35mm camera.Here is an example of a portrait with an 80mm lens on a 6×6 camera: Originally posted 97 months ago. (permalink) antonandreas edited this topic 97 months ago.
This thread is for questions, experiences and tips relating to C41 and E6 home f…
beginner – HP5+ pushed to 3200, DD-X, stand development questions 5 replies
While he admits that digital works better in low light, he chooses film for its ability to accurately portray light. “It’s very, very special I think. When it comes to outdoors and the brights contrasty light, film is perfect. When you look out at the world a lot of color gets lost or not picked up. What I feel about this film is it is actually getting the colors that I see.”
Ilford HP5 is closer to Kodak Tri-X in that it has high contrast but not much grain. If you want something closer to what you’ll get with a digital monochrome look, then HP5 is what you’ll want. With its own unique beauty, it’s best for still life, studio work or products though you can surely use it for almost anything you’d like. For this reason, we recommend it for pros and those of us who are very knowledgeable with light.
JanneM I wasn’t sure as i’ve seen posts on here before where some people imply that if you don’t have X then you might as well not do Y. Time isn’t a massive factor in this, I’d like to get it done by the end of the year, though one of my grandparents had a close call recently which is what brought this to the forefront in my mind.I think you’re right, i should just buy some different films and test the setups with a couple of people (and myself) under different lighting/flash and see how it goes. I do have a Y2 Yellow filter, might hunt down a green one, should be easy enough for 49mm thread. Just wish i didn’t have to wait nearly 3 weeks for B&W developing, really puts you off shooting with it, might try and hunt down a less commercial developer and see if i can get that down a bit.fotojo I don’t have a prime lens in the 85-105 range, i have a 80-205 macro zoom but it has fungus on every element all over, so i doubt it would work well. Though i do have a 2x teleconverter so i could use it on my 50mm to make a 100mm lens, though I’m not sure if that’s a good idea? Personally i have less than perfect skin because i have eczema quite badly on my face/neck which gives me a red blotchy look in colour but B&W is more forgiving.antonandreas It does have a pc sync socket which i assume is x-sync as i doubt it’s anything other than that. here’s a picture of it. I have pics of 99% of my cams on flickr, being a bit of a GAS addict. The Kershaw is 6×6 but it does have a 80mm lens which is on the wide side of normal for a 6×6 isn’t it? Anastigmat is a type of lens coating isn’t it, at least from what i remember.ezwal Large format is out of my league. Medium format is fine, 35mm probably more practical for me, at least for now anyway.I’m going to order a roll of Pan F+, Detla 100 and Plus-X to try out in 35mm. If they produce a result i like i can step up to medium format.I’m going for a fairly stiff portrait style to start with, no smiling, just a neutral expression, then a relaxed smile (not a forced one, CHEESE!), and a couple of dressed up ones with hats/glasses and such. I have an idea in my head but i won’t know what it will look like till i try it, i want them in my style, but i won’t know what the style is till i see it *confusion* 97 months ago (permalink)
I’d use Tri-X in 120 for this developed on soft side (lower contrast). Keep the contrast a bit low or increase the exposure by lowering the film speed. Too many portraits on B&W film show featureless hair for brunets. If your technique is good and you crop somewhat tightly in camera Tri-X in 35mm should be OK. I develop it in D-76 1+2 for finer but not too harsh gain. Today I’d drop to a slower film and increase exposure, e.g. ISO 100 down to EI 50 and reduce development for 35mm. I haven’t shot slower B&W film lately so I can’t give a current recommendation. I’ll recommend testing several films, choose one of the group and then stick with it for a while to learn it well. Dave Hartman 97 months ago (permalink)
I was given a few working Film and Digital Canon EOS type mount cameras r…
Forgot about this thread, flickr recent activity isn’t coded with discussion threads in mind so it tends to slip my mind and keeping track of threads.The Pentax ME Super i’m planning to use has decided to screw itself up with a sticky shutter, so it’s being treated to a full service/CLA for only £40 which comes with a 6 month guarantee on the service 🙂 I bought a roll of Pan F+ and Delta 100 to try in it when it gets back, i also got a Hoya X1 green filter to try as well.How many stops does a X1 filter reduce exposure by? one page i read seemed to say that 2 extra stops were needed to compensate for the filter.Also i dug out the manual for the old Kershaw 450 (i have a boxed one spare) and the sync port is only good at 1/25th, which guess is about right for the 1950’s, annoying but i can work around it. Thanks for the info on the lens, i knew it was a lens configuration or coating, just couldn’t remember off hand which it was. The lens is coated as it has the pinkish reflections when you look at it. I will do a roll in 6×6 since i have the film already, and i also want to see 6×6 B&W negs.I’ll update again when i’ve done some shots, or in response to replies. 97 months ago (permalink)
Effendi also appreciates the unexpected nature of the film. “I love the surprises with film. Once you scan it and you’re just, ‘What is this strange color? I have not seen that.’ It’s not Photoshop. It’s not a filter. It’s just something natural that came out in the chemistry of the film. It’s always very nice to discover that. It’s pleasant, but you didn’t construct it.”
The Tri-X, he adds, is “slightly more expensive than Ilford but I’m a grownup, I can afford it.”
The company release this film with Earl Grey–which is an ISO 100 film for photographers. But if you’re looking for something that’s a cross between many of these films, Lady Grey is your best bet despite the fact that it’s very overlooked partially due to how young it is.
Most of the Impossible Project’s users are enthusiasts. You’ll have some versatility with the Polaroid 600 type cameras, but if you’re a fan of the old Fujifilm emulsion, you’ll need to know that and realize that this isn’t it.
I was lucky to nail focus in this picture, though the large d-o-f of f8 probably helped here. | Belair + Lomography Lady Grey
After Kodak announced it would bring back its Ektachrome film, five years after it was first discontinued, TIME LightBox is taking a look at the state of film photography, asking the manufacturers and photographers to explain why they are still backing the analogue format in the digital age.
On top of this, we recommend that you keep it out of the sun for at least a day. The film needs a lot of light, so be sure to use a flash or overexpose it.
Large format film can be quite expensive, though. “I’ll buy 100 sheets at a time which is a $1500 purchase when I do it,” he says. “For some people that gives them pause. It’s a lot of money but I try not to think about that because it’ll kill you. The price when I started shooting was $7 a sheet. It’s doubled in that time. But I want to make pictures that are worth way more than that.”
There is no best film, just the right film for the right situation and for the right photographer.
Check this set by Sanders McNew. It seems he’s using Tmax, and I know he’s using continuous lighting. I talked to him about his lights some time ago. The shots are NSFW. There’s plenty of skin which will show you the film’s performance when it comes to skin tones. But as I said above, my personal favorite is Delta 100. So I’d go with that.That is a little far away from where I am, but I do have family in the area. Maybe I can arrange something that way? I will definitely get in touch. Thanks for the link. 97 months ago (permalink)
STICKY Your cameras that are not shot on film. A.K.A. Camera porn 112 replies
Pan F is a lovely film. I guess it’s high contrast if you compare it to something like HP5, but I’ve never found it to be problematic. If you’re doing anything in a studio then the contrast of the film really shouldn’t be a problem. After all, you control the lighting, so you therefore also control the contrast.Just to give you an idea, this is Pan F on an overcast day:
Available in 35mm and 120, you’ll probably want to lean more towards the 35mm stuff for street photography and 120 for portraits.
STICKY Theme of the month August 2018 Into the shadows. 15 replies
He enjoys that photographers shooting Portra 160 in low light can underexpose by two stops and still have strong images.
Most recentish 135 film has a DX barcode on the cartridge, usually with a six di…
Portrait photographer Dan Winters chooses the film because of how smart it makes his images look. “It’s a very high acute, it has a great edge effect,” he says. “So there’s the illusion of sharpness that’s actually not even in the image.”
I don’t do my own processing or traditional printing.For less grain, I would shoot TMax. For grain, I would shoot Delta Pro 3200.I take my B&W, occasional TMax 400 or 100 and Delta Pro 3200, to a local traditional photography lab. They suggested careful exposure for TMax. They suggested shooting Delta Pro 3200 at 1600.Since we’re talking about printing from negatives, I would ask the lab’s suggestions on film/developer combinations, and paper choice. I would ask them for suggestions, and run some trials – film + developer + paper.Mention your archival intentions, it may make a difference. I would also settle on print size, and whether the prints would be bordered or borderless, before I got serious about the pictures. Borders? Lately I’ve been dealing with borders because I sent some friends some bordered 8×12 prints along with digital files including the borders. So they could take the digital files to the drugstore for more prints. To me, borders around the image and within the mat window allow short notes like location and date.Good luck. Brian 97 months ago (permalink)
Rena Effendi has experimented with many films, both black-and-white as well as color, but she has found her match. ”I think I kind of have arrived at the Kodak as my film of choice,” she tells TIME. “But I like Kodak Portra now, the normal, the 400. It gives very good results, [it looks] very natural.”
Kodak Portra BW400CN – simply AWESOME for BW Potraits, and you can still buy it locally at places like Walgreens and CVS. It is developed in regular C41 chemistry, so any local minilab can process, scan, and print it for you. 97 months ago (permalink)
One of our favorite films is Ilford Delta 400. With less contrast than the much more famous Kodak Tri-X 400, you’ll find a new look for street photography and portraiture. With slightly less grain than Tri-X, its look is best suited for portraits and street photography.
hi guys, just started shooting film. my first roll was developed and scanned by …
I can’t believe it. I finally won an AR 85/1.8. Now I am whole again. How about …
Here are a bunch of black and white films that we think you’ll fall in love with.
also have a look at filters for black and white, some prefer a yellow filter to lighten the skin tone. 97 months ago (permalink)
The Impossible Project recently came up with a new formula for their black and white film. In our tests, we found it to turn sepia very quickly and stays nowhere as duo-toned as the now gone Fujifilm 3000-B film. According to conversations that we’ve had on Reddit, it stays black and white in less humid environments.
dried_squid Done a bit of googling and there appears to be some kind of independent lab in my town, their website is a bit confusing but they appear to do black and white dev and prints, including hand printing, though i’m not sure what they mean by that since the site doesn’t specify, and at pretty good prices as well. I’ll keep your words in mind when i pay them a visit.So far i’ve just been using Jessops as they are closest and only £4 for dev, but i find there staff a bit thick when it comes to film, i saw one girl handling my negs with bare hands and it made me cringe; and when it comes to black and white/slide they have to send it off to a lab, hence the long turn-around time, and i’ve been less than impressed with the lab they use, whoever they are. 97 months ago (permalink)
The world’s most famous black and white film is one that has been used by many documentary and street photographers. Its high contrast look and gritty, grainy rendering is often best when underexposed just a bit. Despite the grain, you’ll get lots of details too from your photos providing you’ve got a great lens and a great scanner.
As always no comment just the photos. Use your imagination and 2 per month.
I think that T grain films are very good but made for scanning and digital printing, the dynamical range is so great that it is very hard to optically print correctly. Those films are nice in 35mm because, if treated with appropriate care (TMax RS developer at controlled temperature) they give a good resolution and high contrast. However, for optical printing, I would recommend Tri-X in 120, allowing to operate indoors in natural lighting by windows and curtains, with nice, not too intrusive grain if developed also with a fine grain developer. Fomapan 100 in Rodinal stand dev is also amazing. 97 months ago (permalink)
I would say that Pan F+ is a good choice. I’ve had good luck with it.
Janne’s and Mawz’ pointers to Delta are good ones.Ilford XP2 Super exposed at ISO250 gives a very smooth look with a wide tonal range and is processed in the same C-41 chemistry as color negative films. A slightly long lens, in the 85 to 105 range for 35mm format, gives a pretty flattering look to most people. Filtration can help with less than perfect skin, and lighting is the key to good portraits. Can you point us to an example of the kind of portrait you want to make? 97 months ago (permalink)
Let me add if you are making your own prints I recommend a diffusion light source. If your technique is good and your enlarging lens is good you can make very sharp prints with reduced problems with scratches and dust. Many diachronic color heads work very well for printing B&W films.Dave 97 months ago (permalink)
With low contrast and lots of grain, Lomography’s Lady Grey 400 it has a fair amount of contrast, low grain and a look very similar to Fujifilm’s now gone instant black and white film. Most folks seem to use it for street photography and candid shooting.
35mm Color: Cinestill 50 Daylight Xpro C-41 – Stuart Franklin
Greg Miller prefers Kodak’s films because “they’ve got really good at recording skin tones,” he says. “I’m a portrait photographer, that film is perfect for me. I shoot people and I need to shoot in darker places. Their research and development went into creating film where people can a lot of mistakes and still recover.”
Medium Format Color: Kodak Portra 400 Professional – Rena Effendi
We can’t pick one as we get so many in a day or even hour. So I Ask the memb…