Experiments in Photography

[wlotus]

I didn't study, today. I intended to, but you know what they say about the best laid plans.

I did, however, practice my violin. (I need to think of a name for her.) And I edited more photos from my trip to Pocahontas....which got me thinking about comments I've heard from other photographers about film being superior to digital, particularly for black and white photography. (It's all a matter of individual preference; some pros swear by digital for everything, and others won't touch digital with a 20-foot pole. The opposite is also true.) I am not sure if I would feel the same, because I have never shot with black and white film. So tomorrow I intend to buy a roll of Fujifilm Neopan 100 Acros and a roll of Kodak T-Max 100. I'll use them both in my Minolta Maxxum 5, have them developed by the same professional lab, and see which I like best. I'll also compare them to what I can do with my DSLR and see whether I prefer film black and white vs. digital...or if I don't have a preference, after all. It should be interesting!

Comments

[untied.livejournal.com]

i also recommend trying out the ilford fp4, or if you're feeling saucy (and taking action shots) the hp5. there's been some fluctuation in quality control since kodak switched hands, and the fp4 is sometimes cheaper. i find them comparable for the most part, but have an easier time developing the ilford- since you won't be in the dark room, it may matter less.

if you're moving back into film, you may also enjoy playing with some infrared, assuming you have somewhere to develop it. kodak makes a high speed infrared, and the ilford is called sfx. i think there's another brand as well, but i'm unfamiliar with it. it's really cool stuff, and a short day of reading would be enough to give ideas of how to get results. a little more expensive and temperamental, but really cool images.

[wlotus.livejournal.com]

I went with the Ilford Delta 100, because I specifically want to compare ISO 100 films. I expect to like the Fujifilm best, because before I switched to digital back in 2005, I liked their amateur films better than Kodak's amateur films; the colors were more vivid, and the price was lower every time.

I finished the Fujifilm today and can hardly wait to have it developed. I'm tickled by the fact that the professional lab can simply develop the negatives without doing prints, or you can get prints for another $9 or so. (I've never used a professional lab, before.) This first time I'll have prints done, but after this I will just let them develop the film and then scan the negatives.