B&W 4x5 film for indoor sports?

[Tin Can]

"If you take a scene that measures, say, 10 stops from shadow detail to highlight detail, and you "push it" two stops, you basically cut two stops off the shadow end of the scale and end up with 8 stops from the "new" shadow detail to highlight detail. If you still want your original 10 stops, you have to develop longer to increase highlight density an additional two stops. That's all that pushing is, it's under exposure and over development. If done right it can be highly effective."

Best explanation I have read of push.

[Kevin Crisp]

Like Bruce, last time I did this was for sports photography for newspaper work. Tri-X at 1200 or so in Accufine was our standard, 1/125th of a second at f:2.8. Nikon F or a Spotmatic completed the formula. Accufine has an interesting grain structure. Not unpleasant in an 8X10 from 35mm, but quite noticeable. If the available lighting gives you a little fill in the shadows and you keep the contrast range down it could make for outstanding results for newspaper work. The problem was a gym that had just highly direction downward pointing lights. Really hard to avoid empty eye sockets. After being converted to a half tone no grain showed up in the newspaper.

Given the lack of speed in our LF lenses, and the shallow DOF you are going to get using them wide or near wide open, you've set a challenge for yourself. Good luck.

[Jac@stafford.net]

This is probably a 'do not try'. In the Seventies I was desperate to make wonderful indoor gymnastic pictures. I used three electronic flashes, two of them slaved, with infrared filters over the lights. This was intended to keep the light invisible, to not disrupt the athletes.

DISASTER! I do not know if things have changed, but some young women's leotards were semi-transparent to IR, and others reflected as pure white. You can imagine how bad the former were.

None of the negatives left the editing room. Right into the trash.

[Peakbagger]

HP5+ easily pushes to 3200 in DD-X. A magic combo, shoot it all the time in 120.

I know this is 120, but this is about a film type available in 4x5 and a film sped pushing, so please mods, don't get snippidy that it's not 4x5 please.

All HP5+ @ 3200 in DD-X....

This is one of my girlfriends, isn't she cute?

Lol, StoneNYC, yes very cute! :-). Thanks, I happen to have some HP5+ lying about. I will try the DD-X and maybe the accufine too as Kevin mentioned.

[Peakbagger]

Try pre-flashing. I fooled around with this a long time ago using Tri-X 320 pre-flashed and then shot at ISO 5000, developed in Acufine ACU-1. But then I stopped being able to get ACU-1 - not sure how regular Acufine would do as I didn't do this much.

Also, remember that Burnett is often using an Aero-Ektar, a much faster lens.

Hrmm..never thought about pre-flashing. I've tried that with my disastrous attempts using Harman DP. Thanks for the idea!

[Peakbagger]

Thanks for the responses guys, I'm not shooting for anyone but myself here, so if anyone will be disappointed with the results, it would be me!

I've shot with Ilford 3200 on 120 and I rather liked it. Muddy (I mean moody) and somewhat artistic.



I would like to try with my Pacemaker or the Pressman and some lens movements and see what I can get.

[Michael E]

There are things that LF is good at and other things that LF is not good at. If I shot indoor sports on LF film, I would expect pity points for doing it the hard way, but no great images. This is a field where a good digital camera is hard to beat. Just my opinion.

[LabRat]

"If you take a scene that measures, say, 10 stops from shadow detail to highlight detail, and you "push it" two stops, you basically cut two stops off the shadow end of the scale and end up with 8 stops from the "new" shadow detail to highlight detail. If you still want your original 10 stops, you have to develop longer to increase highlight density an additional two stops. That's all that pushing is, it's under exposure and over development. If done right it can be highly effective."

Best explanation I have read of push.

Your ISO speed of the film is the threshold over film base+fog where there is the start of a build up of density... The density areas can build up, but not so much activity down there, as pushing increases density more where there is greater density... So pushing is not a true ISO speed...

Steve K

[Tin Can]

Not my idea. Tell OP Bruce Watson

Now you are confusing...

Your ISO speed of the film is the threshold over film base+fog where there is the start of a build up of density... The density areas can build up, but not so much activity down there, as pushing increases density more where there is greater density... So pushing is not a true ISO speed...

Steve K

[LabRat]

Not my idea. Tell OP Bruce Watson

Now you are confusing...

Bruce's explanation is correct... Just that someone won't get the same shadow detail at a pushed speed, as at the rated ISO... So not a true ISO speed...

Steve K