B&W 4x5 film for indoor sports?

[Peakbagger]

I'd like to shoot some gymnastics at EV7. On my digital, this translates to 1/200 f/4.5 ISO 3200.
Can anyone recommend a film that I can push to 3200 or even 1600 and does well?
Somewhat related - anyone know what film David Burnett used for his Olympics project?

[Kevin Crisp]

Tri-X in Accufine? If the lighting is strongly overhead and casts deep shadows, you aren't going to like the shadows.

[StoneNYC]

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?



The only part of my other GF I'm allowed to show, shot in a very dark bedroom



To round it all off, a girl I went on a date with for a potential third gf, but she wasn't a good fit for me, still a very nice person



And finally, single bulb in a very dimly lit basement...



So you should be fine for what you seem to want to shoot, in 4x5 I doubt there will even be any perceptible grain.

[Corran]

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.

[jp]

If you've got a good rapport with the building manager and have some studio strobes and wireless triggers you could light the place to any brightness you want for stopping action or for a given aperture.

[Tin Can]

Didn't pros once put their own wireless strobes in the rafters and lower for sporting events.

Before DSLR high ISO became the obvious choice for any sports event.

As I found out, athletes want very high IQ, they are all about their body and their physical skill, not art. Sorry couldn't resist.

[Corran]

Yeah, a friend of mine told me about the old days of flashes in the rafters for basketball.

Here in our performance venue no flash photography is allowed without the consent of the presenter - not us as the facility managers as it isn't our show. Obviously for the symphony orchestra this is strictly verboten but for most speaking engagement type things it's allowed (and usually attended by a PR photographer). I would think big flashes could be distracting for athletes in some cases.

[Tin Can]

Yeah, a friend of mine told me about the old days of flashes in the rafters for basketball.

Here in our performance venue no flash photography is allowed without the consent of the presenter - not us as the facility managers as it isn't our show. Obviously for the symphony orchestra this is strictly verboten but for most speaking engagement type things it's allowed (and usually attended by a PR photographer). I would think big flashes could be distracting for athletes in some cases.

Then shoot Delta 3200 in 120. or the subjects will be disappointed. It's a special one time event, failure is not an option. imho

[LabRat]

Royal-X would have been just the ticket, or the old Polaroid 3000 instant films... But alas, all gone...

LF might not be the right tool for the job... Look at your other options...

Steve K

[Bruce Watson]

Can anyone recommend a film that I can push to 3200 or even 1600 and does well?

You should understand that "pushing" doesn't really exist. What does exist is the number of photons required to create a latent image. If you drop below that amount of light, you don't form a latent image, and therefore have nothing for the developer to develop.

When you "push" you are intentionally starving your shadows of sufficient light to make a latent image. What would have been texture or detail is just empty as a result. Which is OK to do, as long as you know you are doing it, and do it for a reason.

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.

That said, I find modern t-grain films aren't as happy being so abused. The old cubic grained films like Tri-X and HP-5+ are able to take it in stride though. So those are the films I'd be looking at for your project. When I was working for the local newspaper doing sports photography (so long ago...) Tri-X and HC-110 were our go-to combination for pushing. But it was all 35mm, long before I discovered LF. And back then even when I was well practiced in the pushing art, I never would have gone for 3200. You just loose too much.