Best choice portrait BW film

[Califmike33]

If one wants that shotgun grain of old-school 35mm photojournalism, then Tri-X makes sense. It depends on what expectations are in a portrait and its degree of enlargement. It's still quite visible in most 4x5 format examples in the lighter areas even at 4X, and somewhat even in 8x10 work magnified even less.
I'd personally avoid anything like that for portraiture, at least of smooth complexions or high-key subjects, if I expected to be paid. But everyone is free to take their path.

Thank you for your opinion.

[Califmike33]

I know the guy on youtube was reviewing FP4+ in 35mm, 120 and 4x5 and giving a very very indepth review of different devolopers and times, going over the shadow, highlights, a very very good video. Given what i have seen and researched i think my film i want to try the most is FP4+ and FP5+. As far as goals of print size i would say 20x24 is likely the largest i would go, maybe a tad bigger. Here you go tell me what you think of his channel and review i think its very good. https://youtu.be/mqB5SQ3BTHE

[Califmike33]

Ok i bought a new tripod today and got to talking to the guy at the camera store, i have known and talked to him in the past, loads of exp, 4x5, 120, printing. So i asked him if i scan my 4x5 BW negatives and print them thru a Canon pro 1000 lets say can i retain that film look. He tells me for sure , no doubt and tell me he can achieve and better print of a digital scan of the 4x5 negative than he can print in the darkroom. He told me a good Epson V700 and a good Epson or Canon printer, the higher end models will achieve stunning results ? love to hear your guys take on this ?.

Years and years ago with i lived in the darkroom i lovedddddddddddddd printing BW so im thinking of doing it again, but if i can achieve the same or better by scanning and printing at home, not sure which way i would go.

[Corran]

The quality of each solely depends on your experience and dedication to getting good results from either printing method. Beyond that, it's a matter of preference with regard to the final print medium. I personally greatly prefer traditional silver prints and would not ever want to futz with an inkjet printer again - my "best of both worlds" is traditional printing and using a lab for on-demand, custom prints as needed. If you loveddddd darkroom printing, why would you not want to go back to that?

[Califmike33]

The quality of each solely depends on your experience and dedication to getting good results from either printing method. Beyond that, it's a matter of preference with regard to the final print medium. I personally greatly prefer traditional silver prints and would not ever want to futz with an inkjet printer again - my "best of both worlds" is traditional printing and using a lab for on-demand, custom prints as needed. If you loveddddd darkroom printing, why would you not want to go back to that?

I did love the darkroom and i am going back i have already signed up here at a local place that rents darkroom time $15 for 5 hours, seems like a steal to me. The reason i question which is best is cause i cannot have a darkroom to print at home and driving back and forth 12 miles each time to go print is not always that easy to do. The ability to print from home and print the same print with a push of the button and Lightroom your negative has some appeal to me. I am looking foward to the whole process or i would have just bought a digital camera, so i really enjoy the loading and devolping film. I think im going to back to the darkroom after i have some images and print and see if that love for darkroom is still there or is the home route more well suited, i will know the moment i make my first test strip in the darkroom.

[Roger Cole]

"I know you can still get old Polaroid but that stuff like ridiculously expensive is there any modern stuff that's come out in the last 5 years?"

SONY DSC by Nokton48, on Flickr

I glued a Sony NexC3 body to a lens board, and it's going to working great for testing. It even indicates exposure. Sony was Sixty bucks at the used camera store. A lot cheaper than Fujiroid

SONY DSC by Nokton48, on Flickr

Test exposure with Nex3 150mm f5.6 chrome Symmar. Camera was handheld! Handheld view camera photography LOL

I'm missing something here. If you want a substitute for Polaroid instant, wouldn't you need to attach it to the back somehow, maybe to take a close up of the ground glass, and not to a lens board?

The idea of attaching a cheap but close up capable - if any would shoot close enough to work - digisnapper to the BACK to take photos of the ground glass is an idea. No exposure estimation but you could then "preserve" the look of one set of focus and movements, play around some, compare, etc. I could see that being useful if one could get it to work.

[Alan Klein]

If one wants that shotgun grain of old-school 35mm photojournalism, then Tri-X makes sense. Just depends on what expectations are in a portrait, as well as its degree of enlargement. It's still quite visible in most 4x5 format examples in the lighter areas even at 4X, and somewhat even in 8x10 work magnified even less.
I'd personally avoid anything like that for portraiture, at least of smooth complexions or high-key subjects, if I expected to be paid. But everyone if free to take their own path.

Grain could block the zits.

[Drew Wiley]

I was about to mention that fact, Alan. But yearbook photographers always had softie filters on hand. I sure had my share of authentic zits at the time, but didn't get the softie treatment like the girls did. And with black and white pan film, a reddish filter nulls them out.

[Michael R]

I was about to mention that fact, Alan. But yearbook photographers always had softie filters on hand. I sure had my share of authentic zits at the time, but didn't get the softie treatment like the girls did. And with black and white pan film, a reddish filter nulls them out.

Worse than that, I remember you saying you had tried some of the cheaper films that turned out to have zits of their own.

[jnantz]

Grain could block the zits.

so could foundation / base, and minor retouching which was done by competent people throughout the 1980s