Rolleiflex & Ilford HP5 better than Kodak Tri-X? - Vlog
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 вер 2024
- I haven't shot any Ilford film in a long time, so I decided to go out and shoot some with a Rolleiflex 75mm f3.5. Do I like it more than Kodak Tri-X? I guess you'll have to watch and find out.
Cinematography by Min Hwang and Christopher Sturm
Ilford Film
www.ilfordphot...
Looking Glass Photo in Berkeley
lookingglassph...
CineStill Df96
cinestillfilm....
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Make sure you follow me on Instagram:
@christophersturm
csturmphoto
csturmphoto.com/
Music:
Ross Traver and Chris Sturm
Small House Big Room
@smallhousebigroom on Instagram
smallhousebigr...
Design and logo:
Eiselle Ty
@eisellecruzty on Twitter
eisellety.com
I keep trying HP5 hoping I'm going to like it, but I always end up back with Tri-x. I agree there is less contrast than Tri-x, but it's the grain I don't like, it's 'mushy' which I don't care for. It's all subjective, but for me it'll always be Tri-x.
I like the grain, seems smoother to me. Im gonna see what its like pushed.
I mean if you’re looking for more Contrast, fuck it just go to TMax or Delta.
Both HP5 & Tri-X are amazing. I felt hp5 was more of a neutral template and Tri-X was slightly colored yet also neutral
I've been digging ilford hp5 so hard lately. Great video as usual
me too! thank you!
The great thing is you get a better tonal scale when you push HP5+ to say iso 1600 compared to Tri-X which indeed is more contrasty. You can get a flatter image with Tri-X too if you shoot at lower iso or pull the film. Choice of developer and development also plays a role of course. Ultimately the goal of both is to be wet printed and that is where your ‘post’ should be ;).
i bought a couple rolls of HP5 to push this weekend while im in LA.
Have fun!
My first choice for my Rolleiflex 2,8f is Tri-X and second HP-5. Tri-x have those characteristic wich match perfectly with rolleiflex: organic grain and glow in highlights. HP-5 on the other hand have good tonality but to neutral for my taste.
Great video! I agree 100 percent with your observation that Hp5 is more grey than Tri-X. I love both films both, but I slightly prefer Tri-X.
Rolleiflex and Rolleicord cameras always give you such super soft and smooth rendering. Love that look.
Also highly recommend the Rolleicord 3.5 if you can do without a release button! It has a sort of lever thing. Works fine.
The Don DeLuxe hey my 2.8F is plenty sharp
@cole turner Yeah, I couldn't afford the 2.8 :-)
The Rolleicord only comes in 3.5 and 4.5 I think. I have the 3.5 with a Schneider lens. It's nice and sharp, but the out-of-focus bits are so silky smooth! Really nice for both portraits and landscape stuff. Wish I had the Rolleiflex 2.8 though :-)
If you shoot HP5 to save money instead then you scan with DSLR. So you have Raw+jpeg files and add more constrast (ex: tone curve) in Post. Does anyone can see the difference between Tri-X 400 vs HP5? The grains are not same?
I wish I had one of those :( Your area looks really peaceful : )
Pre watching the video comment: I've been considering making the switch to Ilford...
Watching the video comment: Man, the music this guy pics is legit good...
Post watching the video comment: Yeah, I'm still learning toward making the switch.
Thanks, dude.
I got a rollieflex T 3.5 for 9 dollars I shot some Gil thru it but never developed them and I’m afraid to look cause I just set the aperture didn’t even think about the shutter speed
I love me some snappy grainy TRI-X. In fact it is my go to 35mm street film because the grain is gorgeous. But I do print it in the darkroom. I can’t seem to get a good a scan out of TRI-X.
I really don't like HP5 at box speed, like you said it's very grey. It's all midtones and you can bump up contrast it up in post but it still looks off (to me), it pushes great though. I've gone to 3200 and it looks clean in medium format, you could probably go another stop no problem.
Probably an immensely stupid question but do you always have to underexpose (Meter) or can you shoot at box speed and push film for more contrast and grain?
@@fodiographer it's not a dumb question! You wanna under expose by setting your meter to the ISO you're pushing to. If you shoot it box speed and push everything will be over developed and blown out
i love seeing the film community helping each other out!
Judging from the video i guess your rolleiflex is Rolleiflex 3.5a if there's a evs system on the shutter speed and aperture dial then it's the Rolleiflex k4b or mx evs
there is no evs.
The Photo Dept. 3.5a it is!
@@ThePhotoDept There is bozo.
Yes pal! Rolleiflex and HP5 are my current go to. Have you tried Caffenol before?
I havent! Ive been meaning to.
Totally agree, Chris. Ever tried the Ilford Delta 400?
Michael Sturm funny you should ask, I have a roll of delta 400 waiting in my drawer as we speak. I’m gonna probably take it for a spin next week.
This video gave me so much nostalgia because last time I was in the bay area i went to the same photo store from the beggining and then went to lake Anza as well, crazy world
oh nice. where did you end up?
@@ThePhotoDept Walnut creek area where i was staying
Nice vid bud. Will there be a video of the pan f?
oh you betcha.
I really wouldn't hang or dry film in that environment. It'll get too dusty!
Forgot sake why are there so many shots of you taking pictures and so few shots of the images
poor pictures....
what an awful comment to leave. get a life
This video is about coffee? I stopped watching
Reuben Zuazua ok
Wait so you literally watched for 30 seconds and stopped? There’s literally footage of me buying film at 32 seconds and then shortly after I load a Rolleiflex with that film, and then talk about film.