Shooting black and white landscapes

[jazzypantz]

Is there any film that you would recommend for this specific type of shooting?

[Andrew O'Neill]

Any panchromatic, or even an infra-red BW film will be fine. Are you new to film... especially large format film?

[Eric Rose]

It all depends on the look and feel you are striving for.

[Lenny Eiger]

All film works. My favorite is Ilford Delta 100 in Xtol 1:1. What kind of images do you want to make?

Lenny

[jazzypantz]

Any panchromatic, or even an infra-red BW film will be fine. Are you new to film... especially large format film?

I have only been shooting film for a couple of years, now - if that.
So, yes - I would say that I'm still new. And I have just started shooting large format, within the past year.

Currently, I have only used Ilford HP5+, 400 speed, for black and white. And for colour, I have used the Portra 400. I don't have the money that large format requires, but my heart has been stolen. So, I'm really just looking to see from more experienced large format shooters if there is a film that you swear by and for what reasons, so I can be more informed in my purchasing of film in the future?

[Heroique]

I loved Polaroid Type 55 for b/w landscapes in flat light where the finest detail was important.

Now the film is gone.

How I miss thee, and await thy resurrection. ;^(

-----
Meantime, T-Max 100 (in T-Max rs) helps me through the pain of loss.

[jazzypantz]

All film works. My favorite is Ilford Delta 100 in Xtol 1:1. What kind of images do you want to make?

Lenny

Right now, I'm on a landscape shooting binge. The most important thing I'm looking for - of course - is clarity and a nice tonal range. While I am sure that these things have a lot to do with the photographer's skill and technique, are there any films that do above average in these areas?

What are the things that make you choose the film you shoot with as your favourite?

[Vaughn]

How you plan on printing is a factor that would be nice to know. Contact printing, scanning the neg, alt (non-silver) printing, degree of enlargement, etc.

Clarity would be more of a factor of optics (as in sharpness), rather than film, though one might confuse clarity with contrast...and any fogging of the film would reduce "clarity" I suppose.

I tend to shy away from HP5 because it does not expand as readily in contrast as FP4, but it is otherwise a fine film. I normally use non-silver processes (carbon or platinum printing), so my requirements for film and developer are much different than someone making silver gelatin enlargements. FP4+ in paper developer works wonders for me, but I would not recommend that combo for enlargements or scanning.

[Bruce Watson]

...I'm really just looking to see from more experienced large format shooters if there is a film that you swear by ...

TMY, aka 400Tmax. Best film ever made. And almost certainly the last chapter in the history of B&W film. It has it all, from fine grade to excellent tonality.

Use it while you can get it. When Kodak finally throws in the towel, it's like won't be seen again.

[jp]

Tmax400 has the clarity and tonal range to suit all of my needs. It's what I swear by. It's versatile in a variety of developers, can handle a huge brightness range, fast and fine grained, but doens't have a "fast film look". Never had a bad sheet or roll of the stuff. Ever. Some people moan about the price, some people about it's requirement for consistent developing.

[Vaughn]

TMax 400 is a fine film...but stay away from TMax100 if one plans on making contact prints using alt processes as it has a UV blocking layer. But for silver gelatin enlargements, I liked what I got from the 100 and HC-110!

[Lachlan 717]

I'd recommend trying any of the Ilford films.

The reason is simple: Ilford is devoted to B&W film for the long haul.

Supporting their products will ensure the best chance of being able to get not only standard sized film (4x5, 8x10 etc), but also the exotic sizes (especially ULF) into the future.

Sure, Kodak films are great (not arguing against their quality here), but Kodak does not seem to have the long term commitment to providing film. Nor do you have access to the company like you do via Simon Galley on APUG.

So, perhaps try some Delta 100, FP4+ and HP5+ in whatever camera you have and see how it comes out?

[Bruce Watson]

...Kodak does not seem to have the long term commitment to providing film.

The zombie myth that just wont die.

Kodak, not Harmon, has spent the R&D money to bring the last, and the best, films to market (Tmax, Portra, vision3, etc.). When did Harmon last bring forth a new film? 30 years ago? Some commitment that is, a commitment to bring you the state of the art of the 1980s.

Kodak OTOH is bringing you the state of the art from the early 21st century. In the 1990s they built an entirely new coating line for B&W. And they are the last company standing producing quality cine films after Fuji dropped out.

You question Kodak's commitment to film? Seriously? Sheesh.

[Gem Singer]

The Ilford HP-5+ film that you are already using will work fine for landscape photography.

Why change?

[Lachlan 717]

The zombie myth that just wont die.

Kodak, not Harmon, has spent the R&D money to bring the last, and the best, films to market (Tmax, Portra, vision3, etc.). When did Harmon last bring forth a new film? 30 years ago? Some commitment that is, a commitment to bring you the state of the art of the 1980s.

Kodak OTOH is bringing you the state of the art from the early 21st century. In the 1990s they built an entirely new coating line for B&W. And they are the last company standing producing quality cine films after Fuji dropped out.

You question Kodak's commitment to film? Seriously? Sheesh.

I'm absolutely questioning it. Sorry if that didn't come across clearly.

To answer your question about their newest film type, 1992. Tmax was introduced in 1986 at Photokina. Therefore, pretty sure Tmax is "…state of the art of the 1980s."

Porta and Vision 3 are moot in the confines of this argument given a) Ilford doesn't produce colour, and b) if you read what I posted, I referred only to B&W, c) as did the OP.

As for your claim that Kodak's films are "the best" films in the market, well, that seems a pretty subjective assumption. What I do know is that Kodak doesn't make the best B&W paper, 'cause they don't make B&W paper. Guess they're committed to having B&W negative slide nights...

Anyway, as I wrote, Ilford is committed to the longevity of B&W film. They're committed to responding to us (see reference to APUG). They're committed to the ULF Special Order run (where's Kodak's version of that? And I don't mean Keith Canham's version. I mean the organisation-generated equivalent.)

They're bringing out new cameras (Harman Titan in 4x5 and 8x10). Not sure when Kodak last brought out a LF camera?

So, to sum up, Kodak's committed to bringing out 1986-era film to shoot on someone else's camera and to print on someone else's paper.

"Sheesh".

[hmf]

I'm absolutely questioning it. Sorry if that didn't come across clearly.

To answer your question about their newest film type, 1992. Tmax was introduced in 1986 at Photokina. Therefore, pretty sure Tmax is "…state of the art of the 1980s."

Porta and Vision 3 are moot in the confines of this argument given a) Ilford doesn't produce colour, and b) if you read what I posted, I referred only to B&W, c) as did the OP.

As for your claim that Kodak's films are "the best" films in the market, well, that seems a pretty subjective assumption. What I do know is that Kodak doesn't make the best B&W paper, 'cause they don't make B&W paper. Guess they're committed to having B&W negative slide nights...

Anyway, as I wrote, Ilford is committed to the longevity of B&W film. They're committed to responding to us (see reference to APUG). They're committed to the ULF Special Order run (where's Kodak's version of that? And I don't mean Keith Canham's version. I mean the organisation-generated equivalent.)

They're bringing out new cameras (Harman Titan in 4x5 and 8x10). Not sure when Kodak last brought out a LF camera?

So, to sum up, Kodak's committed to bringing out 1986-era film to shoot on someone else's camera and to print on someone else's paper.

"Sheesh".

Not to hijack the thread, but is the Titan 8X10 out yet?

[Jerry Bodine]

You question Kodak's commitment to film?

With today's stock price hovering around a whopping 20 cents, I can't see where there's much commitment to film or ANYTHING.

[Lachlan 717]

Not to hijack the thread, but is the Titan 8X10 out yet?

From Simon Galley on APUG, posted 1st March, 2013:

"HARMAN TiTAN's will start shipping from Mobberley to our distributors around the world in teh [sic] next 10 days or so."

[Ivan]

My advice to you is to experiment with the film you already have. Try different hours of the day for your photos or try different developers. That way you'll get familiar with one type of film first, and get to know it, like what you can expect from it etc. Kodak, Ilford etc. is pretty much a personal thing because of all the variables afecting its process.
Remember to have fun, you are at the beginning of a wonderful journey so enjoy it.

[jp]

Even if you don't choose Ilford Film (I usually go Kodak), Ilford must not be ignored when it comes to photo paper. I was never a big fan of Kodak paper, at least what they put out in the 80s/90s. Ilford paper is top quality and in various styles.

[Noah B]

I've shot many rolls of kodak, fuji, and ilford. My absolute favorite is fuji acros and I love the midtones, it's silvery goodness! I started shooting 5x7 a few months ago and unfortunately acros isn't offered in that size. I shot 4 boxes of hp5, but found it too contrasty (in d-76), and then started using XTOL and it came under control a bit. I decided to shoot fp4 on the advice of a colleague and I like it a lot better than hp5. I would say the most important factor in determining how a type of film looks is what developer you use. I used d76 and my highlights got blown out, but when I switched to XTOL it toned those down making it a lot easier when printing. Food 4 thought! :cool:

[drew.saunders]

Currently, I have only used Ilford HP5+, 400 speed, for black and white.

You can certainly stick with HP5+, but you may not need the extra speed for LF, especially if you want to shoot wide open, so you might want to consider FP4+ as well or instead.


So, I'm really just looking to see from more experienced large format shooters if there is a film that you swear by and for what reasons, so I can be more informed in my purchasing of film in the future?

If you ask 10 experienced photographers for the absolute single best film and developer combination, you'll get 11 definitive answers! Nothing wrong with sticking with Ilford.

[John Kasaian]

Good grief! This has degenerated into an Ilford vs Kodak thread!
Since the OP already "knows" Ilford HP-5+ I'd suggest sticking with it unless he wants to learn a new emulsion.
Plenty of great landscapes have been shot on Ilford HP-5+ (and FP-4+)
Kodak TMY and TXP are certainly impressive films too, especially TMY if you can find them in stock and can afford the price (probaby not too difficult with 4x5 but a PITA if you're shooting larger formats)

[kev curry]

Chosing film is personal and comes down to your own aesthetic. You'll find that you'll like the look and feel of certain film and developer combinations over others. I would urge you to ignore any advice that claims that this or that film is the best. Thats exactly the sort of advice that sets new photographers focus on searching for rainbows and magic bullets instead of focusing their attention on the art of photography. Its the wrong place to focus your energy. The best advice from some of the best people is to try a few films and developer combinations then stick with one film and one developer and get to know it as best you can. Concentrate your artistic energies on your photography and learn how to work with the materials that you feel best express your artistic vision. If your keeping your costs down you should try a box of Foma 100 its half the price of the other big name brands. Read all about it here and on other forums. Its looks beautiful in PMK developer out of my eyes. I feel the same with HP5 in PMK or ID11. But its all personal.

[Brian Ellis]

I don't think there's any film that's "best" for landscape. Any normal film from a recognized manufacturer that's properly exposed (based on your personal film speed tests or experience or Sunny 16 or whatever else works for you) and processed (based on your personal development time tests or experience, etc.) should work fine.

I used HP5+ rated at 200.I liked a 400 speed film because that allows for a faster shutter speed than 100 speed and at the print sizes I typically made (11x14, occasionally 16x20) I didn't see any significant adverse effects between it and TMax 100 (the 100 speed film I occasionally used when Readyloads were still around). In my experience faster shutter speeds can often be useful in landscape photography when a gentle breeze is moving foliage around a little. I tried TMax 400 and didn't care for it but that was a long time ago, before Kodak changed it and apparently improved it.

More important IMHO than picking a particular film is to not jump around all the time from one film and developer to another in search of the perfect film. Pick one, learn how to expose and process it, and stick with it for a year or so. If at that point there's something you don't like about it try something else. I think the HP5 you're using is an excellent choice to start with. I processed it in D76 1-1 FWIW.

I wouldn't worry much about Kodak vs Ilford in terms of future availability. Nobody can predict the future and in any event the history of photography has always been one of discontinuing somebody's favorite material. The only difference today is that there are fewer companies and fewer materials than there used to be when Dupont, Agfa, et al were still in the business.

[joselsgil]

I don't have the money that large format requires, but my heart has been stolen. So, I'm really just looking to see from more experienced large format shooters if there is a film that you swear by and for what reasons, so I can be more informed in my purchasing of film in the future?

If you are on a tight budget, (who isn't these days). Look into Arista EDU film sold thru Freestyle Photographic Supply. It is available in ISO 100 and 400 speeds.