Author Topic: LF Film Question (Read 4676 times)

Late Developer · « **on:** October 10, 2011, 01:15:00 PM »

As a complete newbie to this format, I know the next few months (at least) are going to provide a fairly steep learning curve. Also, short of a miracle, they will also involve lots of trial and error with camera and film before I get the hang (or swing) of all the movements, focusing and exposure.

I've done a bit of research and packs of Ilford FP4+ and HP5+ seem damned expensive - though I love the 35mm and 120 versions. Kodak equivalents seem about the same price as Ilford. I can't find any Fuji 100 in 4x5 and the only other options seem to be Foma and Adox - which are relatively cheap at almost half the price of Ilford and Kodak.

My first question is this: Is it better to practice with Adox and/or Foma until I become completely familiar with the Wista workflow or should I "bite the bullet" now and go for Ilford (or Kodak) which I suspect will be a better product and what I will use over the long-term?

Second question: Is there anywhere I can see comparative results - particularly Adox 25 which sounds really interesting as I fancy doing some long exposure shots?

I'd be grateful for any advice . Thanks. Paul.

moominsean · « **Reply #1 on:** October 10, 2011, 02:23:01 PM »

Yeah i bought some cheap shanghai film from ebay, was like three boxes for $15 each. So i wouldn't feel so bad if i screwed it up. But there is plenty of cheap 4x5 on ebay. Just bought 200 sheets of provia for $120.

LT · « **Reply #2 on:** October 10, 2011, 03:21:35 PM »

Quote from: Late Developer on October 10, 2011, 01:15:00 PM

My first question is this: Is it better to practice with Adox and/or Foma until I become completely familiar with the Wista workflow or should I "bite the bullet" now and go for Ilford (or Kodak) which I suspect will be a better product and what I will use over the long-term?

The Adox is actually a very nice film - I use the 100 ... but is prone to damage, emulsion problems, pinholes etc. So get some to practice, and use for work/test shots. I do exactly that, and have a freezer full of hp5+ that I am slowly amassing for when I have a serious project in mind.

THe CHS 100 has slight extra sensitivity to reds, but is in no way an IR film. It makes for nice skies in landscapes especially if they are blue and you use a red or orange filter.

Quote from: Late Developer on October 10, 2011, 01:15:00 PM

Second question: Is there anywhere I can see comparative results - particularly Adox 25 which sounds really interesting as I fancy doing some long exposure shots?

Go to flickr and google the different film types, but be aware of the problems with screens and display calibration. The only true way to compare is to try and see I would suggest - but that doesn't help the bank balance does it.

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #3 on:** October 10, 2011, 06:03:20 PM »

Most of my LF work has been on Foma or Wephota/Adox, which dev's quite nicely in Rodinal. Leon's right that occasional pinholes can be a problem, but then again I've had one or two on big brand boxes as well.

Learning to work 'clean' takes practice so cheap film is a must.

Terry · « **Reply #4 on:** October 10, 2011, 06:35:56 PM »

Paul,

I began playing with 4x5 this summer and have found that it was good to have cheap film to practice with until I felt comfortable using the camera. I bought some Efke and some Arista from Freestyle to experiment with. The Arista has the characteristic blue color to the developer when you empty the tank, so I'm going to say it's Fomapan. It's a bit of a bear to load because it's not packed as nicely as Ilford and sometimes the edges of the sheets are stuck together but it made me much more complacent about mucking up an exposure.

I think LF is a big departure from either 35mm or 120: I just can't work fast using it. Yesterday I had a chance to grab a sunrise shot: I jumped out of the car, stood the tripod, mounted the camera, pulled out the lens and opened the focussing hood, set the shutter on T, pulled focus, metered, loaded the back and made the exposure in about a minute. If I'd been shooting the Exakta or the P6 it would have taken seconds, of course, and I'd have fired off three or four frames. Thankfully I was focussed at infinity so I didn't have to think about f-stop calculations. So, it's a different animal alright. I am coming to like working slowly though; LF is a kind of meditative process. So I'm weighing in on the side of trial-and-error: buy the cheapest film you can get and shoot it all!

Terry

(PS: then go spring for some Ektar....)

astrobeck · « **Reply #5 on:** October 10, 2011, 06:50:37 PM »

Paul,
I'm going to jump the fence and say get a good box up front, even to learn on.
The reason I say this is because you might make a shot that you'll kick yourself later for not having made it on nicer film.

There are no duplicate moments in time. The light, the situation, the mood are always different, so be brave and go for the best right out of the gate.

Besides, when you use better film it will make you think more about what you're doing and will naturally prevent you from having a nonchalant attitude about it.

Phil Bebbington · « **Reply #6 on:** October 10, 2011, 07:11:18 PM »

An interesting read as I've been pondering the jump for a while now. I have clearance from 'er indoors (Jan)

This could take me months to move forward with, but, thank you all for your thoughts.

Late Developer · « **Reply #7 on:** October 10, 2011, 08:01:07 PM »

Wow...!! Thank you everyone for your advice. The consensus approach seems to be to buy cheap and practice hard. Becky makes a valid point that there are no second chances for the right scene, so buy the best and to hell with the cost. Leon's approach seems to straddle the middle ground insofar as Adox CHS 100 seems to be both good and cheap.

In the time since posting the question, I've spoken to a friend of mine who is a pro photographer. It turns out he's got a few assorted boxes of out-of-date unwanted 4x5 film in his fridge that he's prepared to let me have for not a lot of wonga. He's also got a Polaroid back that I can use with some of the Fuji and other instant stuff. Therefore, I'll be taking the lot of his hands. I'll probably get a box of FP4+ and some Adox CHS100 for best.

After I become comfortable with the camera by using up the OOD stock, the thought occurs to be that it might be fun to load Adox 100 on one side of the film holder and FP4+ on the other, take identical shots of a few different scenes and see which I prefer the look of. Then, assuming one is an outright winner, it's job done. We'll see

All I've got to do now is get someone to sew some curtain blackout material over the top of one of my old tee-shirts and I've got a ready-made "snood" for the Wista as well. I already have a cheapo (but workable) 8x loupe to aid focussing, so I should - hopefully - be set up by the end of this month.

Terry makes a good point regarding speed of use but, quality aside, slowing down and getting the shots bang-on in-camera, is most of the reason I'm turning my attention to LF. I doubt it'll ever "replace" my 35mm or MF shooting but I get the impression that LF work can only be done without compromise. That seems like a good discipline to me

Terry · « **Reply #8 on:** October 10, 2011, 10:13:13 PM »

Quote from: Late Developer on October 10, 2011, 08:01:07 PM

I get the impression that LF work can only be done without compromise. That seems like a good discipline to me

Exactly right--and that's what makes it rewarding. That and the fact that standing there with a tripod and a bellows camera is a great way to start a conversation. I've been approached by a number of interested strangers and (so far) no snide digicam mockers.

Late Developer · « **Reply #9 on:** October 11, 2011, 09:24:49 PM »

Here's a couple of photos of my nuts. Digital purely for speed and illustrative purposes. I think I've sourced a replacement nut (Robert Whites) as well as a second-hand "snood" hood - a bit like a turtle-neck tee-shirt.

My mate is selling me a couple of out of date boxes of Ektachrome and Portra 160, together with an old but perfectly functioning Polaroid back so, in theory at least, I'll be sorted by month end.

Phil Bebbington · « **Reply #10 on:** October 11, 2011, 09:29:45 PM »

Quote

Here's a couple of photos of my nuts

You seem very well set there

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #11 on:** October 11, 2011, 09:36:18 PM »

Take care to keep those bellows folds in good order Paul, and don't let them crease wrong - I charge an absolute fortune for replacement bellows.

Late Developer · « **Reply #12 on:** October 11, 2011, 09:43:48 PM »

Cheers Phil. Puerile humour is usually best, at least IMO...!!

Sandeha - joking aside, is there a trick to keeping the folds in-line? I've tried to make sure that the camera front sits in the centre of the back as the bellows are collapsed but it doesn't seem like an exact science. Still, it's good to know that there's someone who could ~~rob me blind~~ assist me if my bellows required replacement at some future stage.

Phil Bebbington · « **Reply #13 on:** October 11, 2011, 10:50:50 PM »

Quote

Cheers Phil. Puerile humour is usually best, at least IMO...!!

Paul, when I'm out of my depth, nuts are always the way to go! The odd thing is, I am contemplating travelling the same route as yourself very soon and given my god awful memory I'll probably end up asking exactly the same questions!

Late Developer · « **Reply #14 on:** October 12, 2011, 12:20:28 AM »

Hi Phil,

Well, Aperture on Museum Street in London has a virtually "mint" rosewood Wista like mine but without a lens - for £590. Patrick and Richard who run the place are good blokes and are usually up for cutting a deal if you're in the market for some kit. There's been a few Wistas on eBay - but pricier on a "buy it now" or riskier if you enter a bidding war.

Not sure what you're after but I wanted a wooden field camera. The fact that there was a 150mm lens as part of the deal made it all the sweeter - it was just the missing nut that gave me some anxiety as I'd no idea from where I might get a replacement.

Good luck. I'm sure you'll remember where to find this thread....

LT · « **Reply #15 on:** October 12, 2011, 07:13:42 AM »

very nice paul. Enjoy using it! (goes without saying really)

(ps the lens is on back to front

)

Francois · « **Reply #16 on:** October 12, 2011, 03:22:53 PM »

Well spotted Leon

Roger Thoms · « **Reply #17 on:** October 12, 2011, 03:39:59 PM »

Quote from: leon taylor on October 12, 2011, 07:13:42 AM

very nice paul. Enjoy using it! (goes without saying really)

(ps the lens is on back to front )

Or more specifically the lens and lens board is on back to front. Nice looking camera btw, have fun with it.

Roger

Late Developer · « **Reply #18 on:** October 12, 2011, 07:10:51 PM »

Yep, lens is on back to front because, apparently, the camera was designed to allow lenses of up to 150mm to be stored that way round instead of having to remove them after use and carry them around separately. Not sure if this is a common feature with other 5x4s but it seems to makes a lot of sense to me.

The other good news with the camera is that whoever traded it, left a 46mm to 52mm step-up ring attached to the front of the lens - so I can use the collection of 52mm black and white filters I have - as well as the Lee 52mm adapter for if I want to use my ND grads and other Lee filters. OK, it's only a couple of quid saved - but it's a bonus I wasn't expecting.

The second-hand (but mint) "Black Jacket" hood I bought from Robert White also arrived today. That looks like a great bit of kit and will also be cheaper than sewing blackout material over one of my tee shirts. Anyone interested in what they look like, check this out:

http://www.quietworks.com/FRAMES_FILES/QW_FILES/BJ_CONTACT_FRAMESET.html

LT · « **Reply #19 on:** October 12, 2011, 07:14:09 PM »

I went down the super cheap route and stitched 3 old t-shirts together. Works very well, if a little bulky.

Phil Bebbington · « **Reply #20 on:** October 12, 2011, 07:21:36 PM »

Quote

I went down the super cheap route and stitched 3 old t-shirts together. Works very well, if a little bulky.

One thing that I found is that my head is way bigger than yours, Leon. It was a squeeze getting in there for a look. But then, my head is big!

Late Developer · « **Reply #21 on:** October 12, 2011, 07:25:12 PM »

Quote from: leon taylor on October 12, 2011, 07:14:09 PM

I went down the super cheap route and stitched 3 old t-shirts together. Works very well, if a little bulky.

I was going to do something similar but when I was talking to the guy at Robert White yesterday, I mentioned that I was after a hood or cloth and he'd just had the "Black Jacket" in as part of a trade. It's actually a bit like one of those Goretex wind-shirt things you can buy. It's a bit "Jimmy Savile" though, as one side is completely silvered to reflect the sun and stop it getting too hot inside.

Given what I paid for it, it was cheaper than 3 tee shirts and I didn't have to chuff about getting them sewn together.

Terry · « **Reply #22 on:** October 13, 2011, 01:29:39 PM »

[/quote]

It's a bit "Jimmy Savile" though, as one side is completely silvered to reflect the sun and stop it getting too hot inside.

[/quote]

And sure to frighten small children too.

Paul Mitchell · « **Reply #23 on:** October 13, 2011, 02:58:15 PM »

Quote from: leon taylor on October 12, 2011, 07:14:09 PM

I went down the super cheap route and stitched 3 old t-shirts together. Works very well, if a little bulky.

You are a cheapskate Leon.... ama gonna get one a these http://www.naturallyparamo.co.uk/Garments/Accessories/Dark-Cloth/19761-/Páramo-Dark-Cloth coz if Mssrs Cornish and Ward use them it's gonna make me a better photog innit...

In actual fact I use a BTZS 'Snood' darkcloth which I bought for £20 from fleabay, it works a treat and also keeps your neck warm when it's cold

Paul

Dave Elden · « **Reply #24 on:** October 14, 2011, 03:17:02 AM »

Re darkcloths, I always wanted one like Karsh (Yousuf) used with the embroidery on the outside, OK for studio but I guess the silvered ones are actually better outside in the sun. Here is a YK one: http://www.sciencetech.technomuses.ca/english/collection/largeimage_karsh.cfm?&imgsrc=fig19

Re film, I don't think the cost per hour of shooting will vary much between small, medium and large format, the increased cost/exposure for LF will be approximately offset by the smaller number of exposures you will make in an hour.

Pete_R · « **Reply #25 on:** October 14, 2011, 10:45:40 AM »

Quote from: Paul Mitchell on October 13, 2011, 02:58:15 PM

You are a cheapskate Leon.... ama gonna get one a these http://www.naturallyparamo.co.uk/Garments/Accessories/Dark-Cloth/19761-/Páramo-Dark-Cloth coz if

And I see they're recommended for medium format as well

. I really must get one - NOT!

Late Developer · « **Reply #26 on:** October 15, 2011, 06:01:01 PM »

Well, aside from a couple of nuts "winging" their way from Wista - at a very nominal cost of £3 each + postage - I'm set for some 5x4 action

My friend sold me his old "Polaroid 545 Land Film Holder". However, he gave me his last 13 sheets of Type 52 film (expired 05/06). I also bought 2x10 boxes of expired Portra 160VC, 1x10 box of expired Ektachrome 100 and 1x10 box of expired Ektachrome 100SW. Lastly, I got 3 extra 5x4 film holders - so I've now got a set of 5 - more than enough for a day's shooting.

Just as a matter of interest, does anyone know if there's any Fuji film that will fit the Polaroid holder or will it become redundant immediately I've used up the Type 52 film? There's some Polaroid film advertised on the big auction site but the prices seem to reflect the extreme scarcity of this dwindling resource....

Author Topic: LF Film Question (Read 4676 times)

Terry

astrobeck

Terry

Terry