Suggestions on 4x5 B&W film with good reciprocity characteristics

[gevalia]

Glad to be back, been away from LF for a while and low on film supplies. I am looking for suggestions on B&W film with good reciprocity. In the past I have used Acros and Efke PL25 with fantastic results. My supply of Efke is all but gone and while I can get Acros, it is expensive and with Fuji, well, I figured I would send out a feeler to see what you guys are using. I had heard that Delta 100's reciprocity is far better that Ilfords sheets say so I have a box coming for testing. Thoughts on others?

Regards,
Ron

[Taija71A]

____

Ron, along with Delta 100... I would also take a look at Kodak T-MAX 400.


http://phototechmag.com/black-and-white-reciprocity-departure-revisited-by-howard-bond/

--
Regards,

-Tim.
________

[John Kasaian]

Tmy!

[John Kasaian]

Actually I find HP-5+ pretty easy to figure out when it comes to reciprocity

[gevalia]

I do have some HP5 that I use on rare occasions, I'll take a look. Thanks.

Tim/John, I spent a few years with Tmax400 and I just do not care for it. Never came to love it like others do.

[Taija71A]

____

Ron, that is so funny! :D
I hear you...
--
I too, also do not personally like T-Max 400 (*Although it definitely is a great Product!).

However, I find that it is... Just a bit too 'Clinical' -- For my taste!

________

[gevalia]

Tim,

YES. When I responded I was looking for a word to describe how I felt about tmax400. Clinical would describe it well.

[Andrew O'Neill]

TMY-2. I don't think it's clinical. It's perfection. You do need to invest some time into how to best use it, though.

[Leigh]

Fuji Acros blows everything else out of the water.

NO compensation required out to 120 seconds, then

only 1/2 stop required out to 1000 seconds.

- Leigh

[polyglot]

Another vote for TMY2. While Acros is "better" in the reciprocity department, TMY2 will always (for anything less than "overnight") give you a shorter exposure than Acros because its reciprocity failure is never 2 stops worse than Acros'.

If you don't want the t-grain straight-line look (Tmax, Acros, Delta), then you're going to suffer much worse reciprocity failure. I'd probably suggest TXP or HP5 as your next-best options for long exposures, but I prefer the look (and shorter exposures!) of TMY2.

Using Rodinal on TMY2 will give you a less-clinical look IMHO.

[Harley Goldman]

Acros for my money if reciprocity is your biggest concern in an all-around outstanding film.

[Leigh]

If you don't want the t-grain straight-line look (Tmax, Acros, Delta)...
Don't group Acros in with the t-grain films.

It's totally different, and far superior.

- Leigh

[Taija71A]

In the past I have used Acros...

____

I am pretty sure (*Like almost everyone else:-), that the 'OP' is well aware... That Acros (and Efke PL25 ) were the top two 'contenders' -- With respect to Reciprocity Characteristics!

I believe... That he is now looking for thoughts? on what the other 'Next best' films are -- In this respect...
--
Regards,

-Tim.
________

[Regular Rod]

Glad to be back, been away from LF for a while and low on film supplies. I am looking for suggestions on B&W film with good reciprocity. In the past I have used Acros and Efke PL25 with fantastic results. My supply of Efke is all but gone and while I can get Acros, it is expensive and with Fuji, well, I figured I would send out a feeler to see what you guys are using. I had heard that Delta 100's reciprocity is far better that Ilfords sheets say so I have a box coming for testing. Thoughts on others?

Regards,
Ron

What do folk mean by "good reciprocity characteristics"?

richard

[Leigh]

What do folk mean by "good reciprocity characteristics"?
If you'd read the thread before you post, you'd find that I gave that information in post #9:
"Fuji Acros blows everything else out of the water.
NO compensation required out to 120 seconds, then
only 1/2 stop required out to 1000 seconds."

- Leigh

[Taija71A]

What do folk mean by "good reciprocity characteristics"? richard

____

Richard, simply put... 'Film Reciprocity' might be explained as follows:


"When the light reaching photographic film is dim enough for the meter to suggest times 'of a second or longer', the reciprocal relationship between light intensity and exposure time breaks down.

As a result, (*Exposure-- 'Italics Added') times must be increased to obtain the desired density in shadow areas".
~~ Howard Bond. ~~

http://phototechmag.com/black-and-white-reciprocity-departure-revisited-by-howard-bond/


For a further explanation... You may also want to examine the following articles:


http://filmphotographyproject.com/content/howto/2011/10/what-reciprocity-failure
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocity_%28photography%29


Richard, don't worry about those forum members... Who always have 'Nothing Nice' to say!


"My mother always told me if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say it".
~~ Donald Faison ~~


Regards,

-Tim.
________

[Taija71A]

>> TMY-2. I don't think it's clinical. It's perfection.

____

Perfection? Hmmmm ???
Say it isn't so Andrew... :)

Andrew, it would 'appear' to me... That many of your latest photos (as posted on Flickr)... Were taken with HP5 Plus and not TMY-2?

If TMY-2 is 'Perfection'... You certainly would not then ever need to use HP5 Plus! :D
Just saying... Care to explain your original statement further?

And Yes... Like the 'OP'... *I* still think that TMY-2 is 'Clinical'.

____



You do need to invest some time into how to best use it, though.

____

Sounds a little bit 'condescending' Andrew! (*At least to me it does)... :(
Andrew, are you saying that the 'OP' did NOT invest the 'time' into using TMY-2

or

...that he doesn't know -- 'How to best use it'?

--
Nice Portfolio BTW! :)

Regards,

-Tim.
________

[Regular Rod]

If you'd read the thread before you post, you'd find that I gave that information in post #9:
"Fuji Acros blows everything else out of the water.
NO compensation required out to 120 seconds, then
only 1/2 stop required out to 1000 seconds."

- Leigh

Oh I read the thread alright but am puzzled by what is deemed to be good and bad reciprocity characteristics. Surely as long as the reciprocity failure is actually known and can be taken into account then it is fine, neither good nor bad, just reciprocity failure?


RR

[Regular Rod]

____

Richard, simply put... 'Film Reciprocity' might be explained as follows:


"When the light reaching photographic film is dim enough for the meter to suggest times 'of a second or longer', the reciprocal relationship between light intensity and exposure time breaks down.

As a result, (*Exposure-- 'Italics Added') times must be increased to obtain the desired density in shadow areas".
~~ Howard Bond. ~~

http://phototechmag.com/black-and-white-reciprocity-departure-revisited-by-howard-bond/


For a further explanation... You may also want to examine the following articles:


http://filmphotographyproject.com/content/howto/2011/10/what-reciprocity-failure
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocity_%28photography%29


Richard, don't worry about those forum members... Who always have 'Nothing Nice' to say!


"My mother always told me if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say it".
~~ Donald Faison ~~


Regards,

-Tim.
________

Thank you I am familiar with the characteristic but simply wanted to know what was the difference between good and bad.

As for forum members with poor manners, I'm used to that, you should see some of the exchanges on the very lightly moderated Viewpoint section of the flyfishing forum in the UK...

:rolleyes:

RR

[Leigh]

Oh I read the thread alright but am puzzled by what is deemed to be good and bad reciprocity characteristics.
OK. That's a reasonable question.

To my mind, the less "correction" required for any long exposure, the less the potential exposure error.

Long exposures are usually the result of some condition that differs from "normal".
It may be poor lighting, it may be use of very small aperture. Whatever. Something is different.

It would seem that adding a correction that varies over a narrow range of subject illumination
just complicates matters further, and adds another potential error when capturing the image.

I think that Acros, with no compensation required up to two minutes, and only 1/2 stop up to 16 minutes,
greatly enhances the likelihood of a proper exposure over a wide range of difficult subjects/situations.

And apologies for the previous terse response. I misunderstood your statement.

- Leigh

[Regular Rod]

OK. That's a reasonable question.

To my mind, the less "correction" required for any long exposure, the less the potential exposure error.

Long exposures are usually the result of some condition that differs from "normal".
It may be poor lighting, it may be use of very small aperture. Whatever. Something is different.

It would seem that adding a correction that varies over a narrow range of subject illumination
just complicates matters further, and adds another potential error when capturing the image.

I think that Acros, with no compensation required up to two minutes, and only 1/2 stop up to 16 minutes,
greatly enhances the likelihood of a proper exposure over a wide range of difficult subjects/situations.

And apologies for the previous terse response. I misunderstood your statement.

- Leigh

No worries and thank you for your explanation.

RR

[Taija71A]

OK. That's a reasonable question.

To my mind, the less "correction" required for any long exposure, the less the potential exposure error.

Long exposures are usually the result of some condition that differs from "normal".
It may be poor lighting, it may be use of very small aperture. Whatever. Something is different.

It would seem that adding a correction that varies over a narrow range of subject illumination
just complicates matters further, and adds another potential error when capturing the image.

I think that Acros, with no compensation required up to two minutes, and only 1/2 stop up to 16 minutes,
greatly enhances the likelihood of a proper exposure over a wide range of difficult subjects/situations.

And apologies for the previous terse response. I misunderstood your statement.

- Leigh

____

Excellent explanation Leigh! BIG :)
--
And yes like many others, I too use Fuji Acros as my 'Go to' 4x5 B&W Film... Not only for it's superb Reciprocity Characteristics -- But also because of it's OrthoPanchromatic Sensitivity!

~~ "There are some things money can't buy. For everything else, there's Mastercard." ~~
(*O'oop's... I meant to say 'ACROS'!). :D




>> ...you should see some of the exchanges on the very lightly moderated Viewpoint section of the flyfishing forum in the UK...

____

Good one Richard!
I know 'absolutely' nothing about Fly Fishing. Maybe I should join? :rolleyes:
--

-Tim.
________

[rcmartins]

One other thing to take into consideration concerning reciprocity failure is the increase in contrast that it carries. The higher the reciprocity failure the higher the constrast will become when the exposure is compensated for shadows. Sometimes it can get out of control and hardly tamed during development/printing. As have already been stated here, but is never too much to emphasize it, Acros and Efke 25 were/are by far the best films in this concern. On the other extreme I find Fomapan 100 which must have the worst reciprocity failure I have experienced. This, however, can be usefull in scenes of low contrast to increase it without resorting to development or printing manipulation - using ND filters.
I must confess that since the death of my beloved and sorely missed Efke 25 I have had to resort to Acros for twilight photography in B&W - There is nothing else that I know that comes close, but if anyone knows of any other film I would hastily buy it. It is not that Acros is not good, on the contrary, it is an excellent film, but it is way too expensive and harder to find by the day.
raul

[Regular Rod]

One other thing to take into consideration concerning reciprocity failure is the increase in contrast that it carries. The higher the reciprocity failure the higher the constrast will become when the exposure is compensated for shadows. Sometimes it can get out of control and hardly tamed during development/printing. As have already been stated here, but is never too much to emphasize it, Acros and Efke 25 were/are by far the best films in this concern. On the other extreme I find Fomapan 100 which must have the worst reciprocity failure I have experienced. This, however, can be usefull in scenes of low contrast to increase it without resorting to development or printing manipulation - using ND filters.
I must confess that since the death of my beloved and sorely missed Efke 25 I have had to resort to Acros for twilight photography in B&W - There is nothing else that I know that comes close, but if anyone knows of any other film I would hastily buy it. It is not that Acros is not good, on the contrary, it is an excellent film, but it is way too expensive and harder to find by the day.raul

Please put your requirements on this thread: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?106314-Securing-Fresh-Supplies-of-25-ASA-LF-Black-and-White-Film

Thank you.

RR

[Andrew O'Neill]

Re: Suggestions on 4x5 B&W film with good reciprocity characteristics








Originally Posted by Andrew O'Neill

>> TMY-2. I don't think it's clinical. It's perfection.
____

Perfection? Hmmmm ???
Say it isn't so Andrew...

Andrew, it would 'appear' to me... That many of your latest photos (as posted on Flickr)... Were taken with HP5 Plus and not TMY-2?

If TMY-2 is 'Perfection'... You certainly would not then ever need to use HP5 Plus!
Just saying... Care to explain your original statement further?

And Yes... Like the 'OP'... *I* still think that TMY-2 is 'Clinical'.

____







Originally Posted by Andrew O'Neill

You do need to invest some time into how to best use it, though.
____

Sounds a little bit 'condescending' Andrew! (*At least to me it does)...
Andrew, are you saying that the 'OP' did NOT invest the 'time' into using TMY-2

or

...that he doesn't know -- 'How to best use it'?

--
Nice Portfolio BTW!

Regards,



Thanks for looking and commenting on my images! I appreciate it. Yes, most of my images are made with HP5. I've got many that I've made with TMY and other films, but I haven't bothered posting them. I've just been too darn busy. I didn't mean to sound condescending. Sorry if I did. Must be getting grumpy in my old age... just turned 50. Cheers!

[Andrew O'Neill]

I had heard that Delta 100's reciprocity is far better that Ilfords sheets say so I have a box coming for testing. Thoughts on others?


That goes for all the Ilford's films I have worked with. I can post my data and once you have completed your testing, compare it with mine if you like.


Andrew

[Harley Goldman]

That goes for all the Ilford's films I have worked with. I can post my data and once you have completed your testing, compare it with mine if you like.


Andrew

Andrew, I would be most interested in seeing your test data. I look forward to it.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Sure, Harley. I find Ilford's data to be a bit over the top.

1 sec metred, 1.3x (1/3rd stop)
8 sec 1.5x (2/3rd stop)
16sec 2x
32sec 2.5x (1 and 1/3rd stop)
64sec 3x ( 1 and 2/3rd stop)
100sec 4x
128sec 5x (2 and 1/3rd stop)
256sec 8x

No development compensation required. As exposure increases, the curve shifts to the right, but contrast stays quite constant. I have found also this with HP5 and FP4.

Andrew