B&W Film Choices for landscape work?

[Thomas Greutmann]

I shoot mostly B&W landscape. I use both TMax 100 and TMax 400, TMax 100 in Readyloads for subjects with a "normal" contrast range, TMax 400 exposed at 200 with reduced development time for subjects with a high contrast range (e.g. bright sunlight in summer). So I usually carry a combination of Readyload films and films in regular holders or Grafmatics. I prefer the Readyload system, if there was only a TMax 400 in Readyloads...

I use D76 for development, rotary development in Jobo 2500 series tanks. I agree with Ed, you don't need a permanent development area. I use a changing bag/tent and daylight tanks and I set everything up in the bathroom when needed. It even works in a family of four.

All the other film/developer combinations mentioned here probably work just as well. I have not tried those. I guess it is more important to pick one of the many combinations available, stick with it and get familiar with the peculiarities of the combination, so you can optimize the results.

Greetings, Thomas

[Daniel_Buck]

I have been shooting almost exclusivly Tri-X 320 (most of my shooting is landscapes or rocks & trees). It seems to be very forgiving (I'm using HC-110 and TF-4) and easy to use. Tri-X 320 probably isn't the finest grain film, but I like a bit of grain. hardly any grain for 2-3 time enlargements though.

I haven't used others to compare, but it's been doing fine for me and I have no need to try out other films. I suspect this will be the same for you as well, once you get your developing dilution & times down pat to what works for you and your film of choice. No matter what film you are using, it'll probably do just fine once you get the development that matches what you are looking for. :-)

[Amund BLix Aaeng]

I`m pretty sure the OP found a suitable film in the four years that has passed since starting this thread.

[Kuzano]

OK... not funny. But I will ask you a question as "devils advocate" before I attempt an answer. Or, I will presume an answer and make a suggestion, to cut the response time frame.

Do you, or at what point in the process, envision your images being converted to digital. Obviously you are going to shoot and process film. But after that, will you have the negs/transparencies scanned to digital, or will you print from negatives.

You obviously have experience with Fuji Transparency, so does it make sense to start using Black and White film? I have a friend who has been shooting Large Format landscape for years. Since he started scanning his images and discovered the power of Photoshop, he no longer shoots anything in Black and White. He says it makes no sense to capture less than the full set of data in a scene, which includes the color information. He does his conversions to B&W in the computer now. With all the conversion plugins that apply special effects to image files, what he says makes sense to me. Grab the whole image while on site. sometimes it's nice to have the flexibility to produce the final output in either color OR B&W.

I suspect this may raise some interesting responses, and I am truly interested in hearing what others think and how they respond to this idea.

[Daniel_Buck]

if I could process color film as easily as I process tri-x, I would convert my B&W shots from color film no questions asked. :-)

[Steve Gledhill]

[QUOTE=Steve Bell;92772] ... Now I've just started using 4x5, I wanted to use my 'standard' combination of Ilford Delta 100 in ID11 1:1, but can't due to non availability. ... QUOTE]

Have I missed something here Steve - or have you? Ilford's current product availability lists shows both Delta 100 in 5x4 sheets and ID-11 as being available.

[Steve Bell]

Steve, I have no problem obtaining 4x5 Delta 100 now. The post you referenced was made on 27-Dec-2004, when Ilford was in trouble. Thankfully those days are past and my fridge and freezer are well stocked.

[Steve Gledhill]

Steve, I have no problem obtaining 4x5 Delta 100 now. The post you referenced was made on 27-Dec-2004, when Ilford was in trouble. Thankfully those days are past and my fridge and freezer are well stocked.

Oooops. One of the hazards of the revival of an old thread!
But I do confuse the

[Steve Gledhill]

Steve, I have no problem obtaining 4x5 Delta 100 now. The post you referenced was made on 27-Dec-2004, when Ilford was in trouble. Thankfully those days are past and my fridge and freezer are well stocked.

Oooops. One of the hazards of the revival of an old thread!
But I do sometimes confuse the post date with the join date!

[Savant]

About four months ago I started using Fujifilm Acros. I live in a very small apartment, and I have no access to a darkroom. I have been relying very successfully on a professional lab for processing. It is my belief that I am probably their only customer shooting 4 X 5 Acros, it is possible that they adjusted their processing of this film to suit my exposure of this film, but I do not believe so. From the start my exposures and their processing seem to be very good.
There is one extreme custom lab processing this film here in Berlin, but I use just a good professional lab.
I am shooting portraits with 120, and landscapes with 4 X 5.
I have not perfected visualization of which filter to use with my landscapes, I just need to shoot more film and keep using my filters. This film does respond differently to filters, than T-Max 100, filter factors seem to be a little different also.
Looking at Fujifilms data page, it appears that the use of a red filter is ok, I was not sure with the fall off just beyond 600 nanometers. I will shoot some with the red filter next outing.
This film is Beautiful, beyond a doubt, I hope everyone uses it to keep Fuji making it.