which film for landscape

[johnjoseph]

I' m intending to get into large format photography - black and white landscape . It seems important that you become very familiar with the film you use . Best choices seem to be Ilford FP4 or Kodak TMax 100 . Which would you recommend ? I will want to teach myself to develop and print it .

[jeroldharter]

You don't mention where you live which could affect availability. You will get many answers to this question. I do mostly landscape photography or abstract nature shots. I suggest you start with TMAX 400. Its curve is pretty linear so it tolerates some overexposure. Reciprocity compensation is straightforward and less often needed due to the higher film speed. For a developer I suggest Xtol which is cheap, easy, versatile, and readily available.

[John Kasaian]

Which format? TMY is brutally expensive for learning on if you're shooting 8x10. It is a lovely film though. FP-4+ is what most of the people I know shoot and the results speak for themselves---beautifully!:D

[Vaughn]

FP4 if your exposure times are generally 1 second or two or less. TMax if your exposure times are likely to be 5 seconds or more. Just based on ease of use.

But not TMax 100 if you plan on using your negs directly for alternative processes requiring UV light -- TMax100 has a UV blocking layer (FP4+ and TMax400 does not.)

[A49]

Which format?

...and I ask too which negative format and which intended print format? The film choice depends on how much enlargement in the end is needed and how much grain in your print you are ready to accept.

Andreas

[Oren Grad]

You don't need just a film that you're happy with - you need a film/paper combination that you're happy with, because it's the interaction between the film and paper curves that determines the tonal scale of your prints.

Anyway, just about every B&W sheet film on the market has its partisans. FWIW I prefer HP5 Plus, developed in D-76 and usually contact printed on Ilford Multigrade FB Warmtone, sometimes on Multigrade IV FB, once in a while on something else.

[Peter Gomena]

I'm really liking FP4+ these days. If you're a beginner, it's a bit easier to deal with than T-Max 100, which demands good process control and consistency. (Good habits for any film.)

I've used both, and I prefer FP4+. I like to process it in Pyrocat HD, but if you are a beginner, Xtol or D-76 are good choices.

Peter Gomena

[sanking]

I' m intending to get into large format photography - black and white landscape . It seems important that you become very familiar with the film you use . Best choices seem to be Ilford FP4 or Kodak TMax 100 . Which would you recommend ? I will want to teach myself to develop and print it .


If you do a lot of work in low light conditions films that have low reciprocity failure are worth their weight in gold. In the category of films that have *very* low reciprocity failure, and very fine grain and very high resolution, Fuji Acros is the best. And by a lot, even compared to Tmax-100, which is also a great film.

Sandy King

[Oren Grad]

In the category of films that have *very* low reciprocity failure, and very fine grain and very high resolution, Fuji Acros is the best. And by a lot, even compared to Tmax-100, which is also a great film.

Speaking of reciprocity failure: at what point, if any, does Acros's effective speed cross over that of TMY2?

[John NYC]

If you do a lot of work in low light conditions films that have low reciprocity failure are worth their weight in gold. In the category of films that have *very* low reciprocity failure, and very fine grain and very high resolution, Fuji Acros is the best. And by a lot, even compared to Tmax-100, which is also a great film.

Sandy King

Yes, it is really too bad you can't get it in 8x10 (at least I haven't found it in the U.S.).

[Brian Stein]

Acros is available in Japan in 8x10. Dont know about shipping but japanexposures will kick you JPY 13000 for 20 sheets: about US$160.

Comparison of TMX,TMY, Acros reciprocity is here at http://silvergrain.org/Photo-Tech/reciprocity.html. Things start to separate between 10 and 100 sec
Testing at http://home.earthlink.net/~kitathome/LunarLight/moonlight_gallery/technique/reciprocity.htm suggests no significant correction needed for acros if exposures are under 15 min.
I had a bunch of this in quickload which is nearly dead; shame they dont make in 5x7 (only half-plate I think).

Back to the OP question: I dont think it matters much.
Pick a film that you can easily get, a paper you can easily get (if doing silver-gelatin), use a standard developer you can easily get and go for it. As suggested above a standard film like FP4 or acros with d76 or xtol will get you a long way. Once you have made all the standard LF errors of the first hundred sheets and first 5 sheets after not doing it for a while, then think about more variables. FWIW my choice is HP5+ (i like the extra 2 stops and I cant get acros in 5x7) pyrocat-mc and toned cyanotype (until I get brave enough to try carbon).

[Liam:]

Just so you all know, Fp4's reciprocity failure can be worked out with this equation..

Ec=Em^1.48

Where Ec is the corrected exposure, and Em is the measured exposure, in seconds. Measured exposures of one second or less do not require any compensation.

I think someone from Kodak posted it on this forum years ago as I found it hidden in the posts.

[Bruce Barlow]

I vote for HP5, Tmax 400, or Tri-X. I want as much speed as possible to give me as much flexibility as possible, whether it's 4x5, 5x7 or 8x10. They're all great for what you want to do, but pick ONE and use it. No "film of the month club!"

Have fun!

[BetterSense]

The correct answer to any "which film for X" question is "Tmax 400".

Although I hear it's really expensive in 8x10.

[Eric Biggerstaff]

I have been using Delta 100 for the past couple of years, very nice film and worth consideration.

[Drew Wiley]

I've pretty much shot them all for landscape. The new TMax 400 is splendid. ACROS is
another favorite of mine, but the sheets I've gotten in 8X10 are a bit thin and don't
stay very flat in a conventional holder (I resort to the adhesive holders) - hard to get
in 8X10 anyway. I'm shooting it in 4x5 in the high Sierra later this wk. FP4 is obviously a favorite of many, but a bit slow speed at times. HP5 is popular in 8x10, but with more toe than I like for harsh lighting. TMax 100 is harder to learn, and I never cared for the poor edge effect for landscape work - might as well go right to 400-speed TMax now that it's relatively fine-grained. You're going to get all kind of opinions
not only because each of us has a little different kind of vision, but because there are
in fact so many good films to choose from.

[pergorm]

Hello!

I use ADOX CHS50 developed in XTOL for most of my black and white work. I find this to be a good combinatio....

Per

[David Beal]

The short answer is that when you find the film and paper combination you like, you'll know it.

"New technology" films such as Delta 100, TMX and TMY are reputed to be good for landscapes but not as good as "old technology" films for portraiture. I don't think the reverse is true: A few years ago I shot some original Tri-X, and that was pretty impressive for landscapes.

I shoot Delta 100 at ISO 50 and develop in Rodinal 1:50. I like it; others may not. By all means consider TMY (TMax 400) if you think light may be a problem. There was a View Camera article comparing TMY with TMX, and they were close enough together that my old eyes couldn't tell the difference.

But don't waste too much time choosing. Just get out there.

And Good Shooting!

David

[ki6mf]

HP 5 shot at ISO 200-300 depending on film test, search for posts on LF for this. A diluted developer, pain due to the longer times, and it allows you to cut development times to tone down highlights, again search the forum for the testing you need. Make sure your chemistry temperature is constant for developer, stop, fix, and Hypo!!! 68f or equivalent for Celsius.