At 69, I'm quite an ageing photographer now, but my advantage is that I started with film and developed it myself. And that was at a time when film and paper were still affordable. I shot digitally for the first time in 1993 (with a Kodak DCS-100 system) and that was the start of the digital age for me - I sold all my analog cameras and only worked digitally. But at some point I wanted to go back to my roots and ended up with a Nikon F4s again, doing analog projects that I had already done digitally. Despite my knowledge of film, I had to dig deep to reactivate the old knowledge. I can imagine that users who are used to digital will have their difficulties with film at the beginning. You can't expect to take better photos with film, it's just a special art form and should only be used for that. In addition, really good negative film (I consider the Kodak Tri-X 400 to be such a film developed in an Ilford developer) seems almost unaffordable. A little tip for people with less money - the AGFA APX-100 and 400 are affordable and developed in Ilford Ilfosol 3 are also quite high-contrast and fine-grained enough. It is best to use tilt development.
Great videos, as always. How do you know where are the shadow areas compared to the grey values on the tone curve? The grey scale moves if the image is underexposed or pushed
Having shot film quite poorly for three decades - I found the "shooting on film doesn't make it good" part of this vid particularly relevant. Many of the new-to-film photographers have the mentality and I can't help but laugh when someone is showing a photo that has missed the basics of good photography and follow it up with "and I shot that on fiiiiiilllllmmmm." In the last couple years the social media groups for film photography have been over-ran with new film shooters (a good thing) who ask "what went wrong" or "did the lab mess up my film" because they didn't bother reading the manual for their camera and/or take the time to learn the basics of all photography. I don't mean this in a "mean" way - it is just entertaining to watch the process/struggle in regards to something that was so commonplace before their time. I have helped out several new-to-film photographer at a couple local parks frequented by photographers - and always like pointing out that it isn't as hard to get serviceable pictures with film - after all their Uncle Bob took thousands of decent ones with no more knowledge than turn the camera on, line up the two halves in the eye-hole and make sure the meter-thingy is in the middle. The "Ah-ha" moment once they understand the basics of aperture and exposure and it's relation is fun to see - and then the realization it applies to digital as well and gives them a lot of creative control over their photography. This was an excellent video, very well explained!
Thank you, with digital you can skim by without really knowing whats going on with exposure. Like you say once someone has the lightbulb go off. it is cool to see!
Also, a lot of beginners start out with cameras without a degree of control on at least one of the corners of the exposure triangle. Either the camera does one thing only, and they meet the ideal conditions sometimes but not others, or the camera's automation intuits exposure as intended sometimes and not others. So I can get why sometimes it's difficult for them to pinpoint and what is and isn't working. A dslr or mirrorless has everything you need to learn all of the tenets and film won't automatically make you better, but depending on the film camera, it can force you to become aware of the fundamentals.
There's a lot of crap advice on the internet about film shooting so it's good to see someone who knows what he's talking about from experience. I know you know what you're talking about because I'm of the same generation with an almost identical experience. Yes! choose a good quality, readily available black and white film that's been around for decades, like Ilford FP4 and learn how to drive that before venturing into something else. If you drive a different car everyday you're never going to learn how to drive any of them well. Same goes for cameras, get a straightforward, manual exposure camera in whatever format takes your fancy and stick with it. Don't fall into the trap of buying every fully auto point and shoot on the planet because they are cheap to buy. You'll be chasing your own ass forever and get nowhere. I see a lot of crap black and white images on social media. Often low contrast and flat. I suspect that there's a lot of newbies out there who have never seen a real good quality sparkly print in real life. Visiting art galleries with real prints is a good idea.
Seeing a really good black and white print really can change how you look at things ( and make you want to throw in the towel 😂) hopefully inspire you and let you know what’s possible!
you can also add the fact that social media, for black and white, is not the real end of the process... ? printing is in my opinion the end of the circle for the whole black and white processing, lot of stuff to learn and compare, but some books hit the point with really good exemple on how to expose all the way to the printing process. it can be a eal rabbit hole. and for some, it can be frightening (sorry for my english)
@@postgarodegoogle2389 I agree with everything you say. I was talking specifically about UA-cam photographers who go online to give advice to novice photographers. This UA-cam channel is excellent and I cannot fault it. It reflects my own 40 years of experience. However many UA-cam channels are nowhere near the same standard as this one. Specifically those that advice use of multiple film stocks from the get go and complain about the cost of lab processing black and white film. These UA-camrs are paying a lab to process their film and then setting themselves up as mentors, really?
Great advice. One or two films, one film developer, one paper developer. I've worked to that pretty much consistently for over 40 years. I had to switch from Tri-X to HP5+ around 10 years ago because of cost, and from Acros to FP4+ for the same reason, and from Dektol to Ilford Bromophen a couple of years ago when Dektol became impossible to get in the UK reliably. Otherwise I don't want any surprises with my materials, I want to know what I'm going to get, and that consistency comes with sticking with what you know. And I always spot meter and then deliberately overexpose by half a stop or so. That gives me negatives which will print nicely with my enlarger at grade 2, 2.5 or 3 99% of the time, and with enough shadow and highlight detail that I can choose how I want a print to look with lots of options to change the outcome. This saves money on test strips and test prints because I can usually hone in on the right printing exposure very quickly. Printing my early negatives can be frustrating before I settled on this consistency, as there is a lot of variation in negative density and development, and each print can be a real challenge.
I usually try not to go below 2x focal length for shutterspeed - especially for super tele photo stuff without IS. With my 300mm lens I will almost certainly use a tripod if I don't have any point for anchoring myself. The journey of shooting and printing film has been an absolute eye opener for me so far, just the best experience there is.
Thank you for your expertise. Had I had the opportunity to see this content 12 months ago I could have saved a lot of headaches and failures. Long story short. I started my analogue journey 12 months ago. I was going back and forth between 35mm and 120, ISO 50 and ISO400, Rodinal and Ilfosol, 1+8, 1+25 dev and stand dev as the only thing those days I was sure of is the black and white world and the square format. I also used several cameras. Finally, I settled at 35mm Nikon FE2 2.5/35mm for flexible shoots and 120 with Weltax 6x6 folding camera for lonely, meditative photo walks. My film of choice today is FP4+ at ISO100, developer is Rodinal at 1+25 (8 minutes) that provides excellent results on 120, but a bit too grainy results on 35mm (that I crop to square format too). Finally, a sturdy Manfrotto tripod made a great job, not only by stabilizing the shot but by forcing me to think twice as well. Results? My keeper rate increased dramatically, beyond any expectation. And the garins! I started loving them.
Lots of good practical advice. I really appreciate the time you took to distinguishing "under exposing" and "pushing" film. The subtle nuance was so much easier to explain when you used the tone curve diagram. Until your video, I wouldn't have known how I would have verbalized it.
wow thanks a lot. this is realy well explained. I just srated with film and I have to say I still fight the exposure. Is there a good way to measure underexposure for a night shots. I try to measure exposure for my lights but it seems still bit too low contrast for me. sometimes I get the blacks right but not all the time. I also use a mobile app for this. maybe I need a proper lightmeter? Thanks.
Metering at night can be tricky. Tripod can be necessary depending on what and how you are shooting. Most light meters will struggle in real darkness as there is no light to read, but having a “real” meter is probably a good idea. If you ever change phones etc… things could be totally different and can help to have a standard to judge by 👍
The focal length guide is the best advice. If you are coming from digital, you are accustomed to auto ISO, regardless of stabilisation. Also the flip from protecting highlights to protecting shadows. This has been my biggest challenge, and I have been overexposing half a stop on the last few rolls, but waiting to see the results. I generally like to push HP5 1 stop for added contrast. As an added bonus, this increases shutter speed, for less blurry images.
Depending on your final out put you can still overexpose a bit and give more development for the conrast push. Curve of the film does not change much with exposure and you can always print down.
I've been using the same film for years. Since I also developed it myself, I have the opportunity to optimize the development for my use. Initially, I developed it neutrally, but later in the darkroom I had to choose a higher contrastfilter that also made the grain appear stronger. In the meantime I have optimized my development so that I have a very good contrast on the negative, but also details in highlights and shadows are preserved. The grain on the negative has also become smaller. Later in the darkroom, I can use neutral contrast filters or even low contrast filters. Even on large pictures of ~1.5m diagonal, a subtle grain can be seen, which is hardly noticeable. All this from 35mm film and in medium format even sharper and richer in detail.
Really appreciate the Bruce Barnbaum style breakdown on exposure curves and really love the chart mapped to zone system - like you said it's all about putting in the reps so sometimes even when I think I've visualized a photo well and done all the light readings, I'm still disappointed with how those values landed for the exact reason of not having enough tonal separation. If it's at all possible I would love more videos just geeking out/breaking down characteristic curves based on different stocks and developers. Thanks again!
Great advice. I always struggle with exposure compensation and have to think about it with bright and dark backgrounds. When I think about it I struggle a lot 😂
My B&W experience has been pretty funky in general. It's not something I shoot with digital cameras, as the cameras I have don't have the profile, so I find visualizing monochrome really hard. I do end up with good images on almost every roll though somehow. I usually have color and B&W loaded in two cameras at the time and I choose which one to shoot depending on the weather and time of day, or mood.
Excellent coverage of critical elements of how film behaves. Would be interested to get your take on two points. First, measuring the light: both in-board camera and external meters can vary in how they measure. Get to know your meter's behavior and how each reads light to give a gray tone (e.g. blacks read gray, so it overexposes; white reads gray so it underexposes. A miss here dooms the shot. I get the impression from a myriad of posts that people really don't understand how a meter works and it leads to errors. Second, some sources assert that box speed often varies from "true" speed. For example, HP5 box speed is 400, but many recommend shooting it at 250. TriX seems to work well shot at 200. I shoot this way and have found my negatives print and scan nicely, presuming I get the exposures correct. But, I wonder if this is more about my preference for higher contrast rather than flatter negatives (which is easier to print?). And, of course, there is important interplay with scene contrast, exposure and development time/agitation. Lots of moving parts, yeah?
Michael Kenna shoots (mostly) Tri-X, unless he's traveling and can't get it then he shoots whatever is locally available. He actually sends his film out for processing. He might specify d_76/ID-11 for 11 minutes, but I got the impression he didn't really care what they processed it in. But he does like surprises! 🙂 I'm partial to Ilford FP4+ in D-76/ID-11 for 11 minutes. My film experimenting days are long behind me. (Except for sheet film, 4x5 is a great way to try a new film, because you can always shoot your standard film alongside it. (I guess you could do the same thing with a Hasselblad back...)
I have read that about Michael Kenna as well and it makes sense. He has a lot of confidence in his ability get out of the negative what he wants in the darkroom. I’ve learned to deal with a lot of different “situations” with negatives in the darkroom but if I can make it easier on myself I will 👍. Also for me sending my B&W to a lab is not worth the risk. I’ve heard many stories of scratching & issues. But if you have a good quality lab this should never happen. Not saying this is the new standard but most people now just want the scans… not an issue if there is a scratch.
Just found your channel, UA-cam suggested. Great video, can you take this one a bit further, showing how you meter a scene for black & white. I’m now subscribed!
My biggest struggle has been exposing properly. Learning where on the zone to place my shadows and dark textured objects and in high contrast situations. And getting stuck trying to find the right stock for me
Solid foundation information i this vid. One film, one developer, meter carefully, and when in doubt, overexpose a bit. Stay very consistent in your development process (time, temps, dilutions).
Great advice. I just shot a roll of 120 Ilford FP4+ at 800iso as I mistakenly thought I had loaded HP5+ (and I needed the extra speed on an overcast day). Should be interesting when I develop it later today. Luckily I also shot a roll of HP5 so I should have some 'normal' images.
Try drawing out dev with minimal minimal agitation possibly stand dev... and maybe go for a Phenidone based developer... IE. Microphen. Then throw some salt over your shoulder and stand on your head! But seriously give it a long development with as much time for the shadows to develop as possible. while exhausting the highlight development (minimal agitation, more dillute, stand) Good luck!!!
I like pushing film mainly because I got like 16 rolls of ilford pan 100, and I find 100 to be too slow with my lenses so I end up pushing it to 400. In that case, to better utilize the smaller dynamic range should I make sure to expose for the midtones and compose it so that my main subject is there and not expect detail at the extremes?
It is a bit scene dependent. but that would be a good approach and just realize that your shadows will tend to go black and use this to your advantage. 👍
Learning to shoot black and white will definitely help you shoot on film. If you have been shooting digital learning to do black and white conversions or using built in b+w simulations can make you a better film shooter.
Thank you for your excellent “mistakes” series. It is extremely important to know the errors. For me underexposing the film is actually the biggest mistake. Your explanation of this is perfect! To avoid camera shake, I often used exposure times that were too short. The result was underexposed negatives, the deep shadows were practically non-existent. There's no way to fix this. The print from such a negative appears gray and weak. With a film test according to Ansel Adams you practically always only get half the ISO sensitivity. To avoid underexposure, I halve the ISO value and apply the simple and safe sunny 16 rule. I found that overexposure, however, is not a problem. The second problem is overdevelopment. This makes the negative too contrasty. It's very difficult to bring it on paper. The combination of both mistakes: underexposure + overdevelopment = pushing.
Yup. Can be amazing look for the right look and image. But best to get a full tonal range on the negative first… can always crank contrast in the darkroom too 😁
Hi Matt What's the tripod you are using with the hassy ? Peak design ? I need a better travel/hiking tripod . I don't know why people lark around with all these novelty repackaged films ? Give my HP5 or FP4 any day , as for saving a couple of dollars by using cheap stuff , I feel given the time investment, cost of fuel to get to a locations why save a couple of dollars on the most important thing . Its like fishing , it doesn't matter if the rod is carbon fibre or 50 year old fibreglass if the hook on the end of the line in blunt or snaps easily !
It’s the Peak design. Carbon fiber. I really love it. Comes in so handy. If I can use my other ones I do but this is so light and portable can always have it with. Hasselblad works surprisingly well on it… might want to be careful with that 250mm though. Yeah HP5 is a great standard and trying to warm up to FP4 again 😁
Definitely have noticed the preconception that being on film somehow intrinsically makes it better. I started doing both digital and film photography in 2002, and back then many viewed digital as a bother in that people shot so indiscriminately. I know I did too. But alas, not every photo is worth taking, much less worth posting for others to see. It's a bit funny that now new film shooters are doing so much of the same now, but it being film somehow supposedly makes it better.
I understand why… I always want to know if an image (especially on B&W) was shot on film or digital. It shouldn’t (and doesn’t) matter but I understand what goes into making both so I do give more clout to the film images. But how good the actual image is really has no bearing on the format.
I've taken maybe 14 rolls over these past few months of this new hobby of mine. It just occurred to me watching y our video that I am doing it backwards. I drop my film off to be developed and scanned. I have always requested to get the standard resolution scans because it is a bit cheaper. Why would I spend extra money on these novice photos? I haven't gotten prints yet either. But I probably should at least be getting the higher resolution scans, right? Then I won't have to wonder if the photos are terrible because of the scan resolution or because of me. It will obviously be me! :)
I don’t think what you’re doing is a bad way to go about it. As long as you can judge if it’s a good image and maybe post it to Insta. Then if you find a great image you love you can scan it have it scanned at a high resolution for print 👍
my biggest mistake, still happening today, is to underexpose some shots. Mostly in bad light conditions. Don't know if my light meters (yes, two, an old one and a new one) do not work that well in that cases and give me wrong numbers (but they differ 1/2 stop on all readings antyime) or my film stock (Fomapan 100) does need more overexposure in low light conditions. But my shots then are low-contrast and almost flat, even when pushing and self-developing. And I like my pictures to have the maximum depth of detail. But I'm still learning and experimenting, at the end of the day the joy of the whole process is still pleasing, despite the unsatisfying outcome sometimes.
I use several meters as well (for convenience) I think it would be best to just use one. But... So I try to stay consistent from camera to camera so I can understand / prepare for whats happening. You nailed it. Having fun is the most important!
I have problems with HP5 looking good. I even shot one roll 1 stop over exposed. There's just too much grain in mine. I bought another roll to try again. I sent the other 2 rolls to camera stores. Different stores but same result. I love Tmax100 though. Yes I'm one of those trying different stock. But I grew up with film. We just had point and shoot cameras with no controls. And I'm used to matrix metering in my digital cameras. I'm learning how to meter with my film cameras to get the exposure correct. I'm learning to point to the shady areas to expose for the shadows. I'm used to raising the shadows with digital so I get a little sloppy with my exposure. You can't do that with film. I also like the versatility of FP4 125. I can shoot it at 500 and push it 2 stops.
I feel like I have a lot of images that would be great if I could take them into the darkroom and do some dodging and burning. I don't have the space and I can't find a community darkroom anywhere in my area so I'm scanning them at home. I'm just so bad at editing digitally and while I could probably learn, I find that editing just makes me sad, bored and grumpy. Still, I almost always have at least one, usually two to three pretty great shots per roll so that ratio isn't too bad. I just wish I could save those few almost great shots that lack the separation they need to really stand out.
First, I am old enough to have started my photography when digital was not available.I also never got interested in that, because it would mean changing my darkroom in a computer, what I don-t want to do. I do both color and black & white prints in my darkroom. So, the problems digital shooters have when trying film do not apply. Most obvious are stupid mistakes - such as setting the film speed wrong, or thinking the light in your darkroom is off, when it is not. Loadind the film in a way it doesn't feed. These thing still happen, even with years of experience. Screwing up totally with chemistry, such as wrong time, or wrong mixing of developer. Pouring the fixer in first. There is an unlimited amount of small mistakes you can do that ruin your film totally. Having a Ilford Multigrade filter 3 in the enlarger drawer when printing color and not understanding why the prints are green.
Definitely swapping films has been a mistake for me. I have some great images with HP5+ and should just keep going with that tbh... but I have a heap of colour film to shoot now so back to b&w in a bit.
Interesting the read the comments. One person thanks you for sharing all the mistakes. I think it's vital. The worst teaching, generally speaking, is limited to "Want this? Do this, then do this, then do this." And what if the result doesn't work out? How, then, does a student determine what went wrong? If we don't know how something works, we are limited in our ability to control it. That's one reason I don't try to repair electrical or plumbing problems in my house. But I can look at a negative and a print and know what the problem is and where to start looking for the cause. Not enough education offers this.
Unless you do it all yourself, properly exposed films come back with no shades in the sky, which is really disappointing. As opposed to what they say in books and videos there is no difference here between digital and films. Digitals nowadays actually handle highlights better than films. (Using a filter can be an option but I still need to decide if I like it. I'm not a big fan of a polarizer with digital photos at least.) Also I prefer black to grey in dark areas in the images. So I will continue underexposing the films.
@@masaradon8448 I think you have to consider the final output too. If printing film can handle a TON on the high end & if you give more exposure you can always print down ( if printing )
I am guilty of using many films and thinking anything shot must be good because it is film! What I started doing is using my digital camera (in the black and white viewing mode) to see what happens. Amazing what is garbage in digital color is garbage in digital black and white - which is garbage in film black and white. But if the digital black and white photo has merit - I break out the film camera.
The issue for the ones that learn to shoot the black and white on film - is visualisation. The digital camera can be set to the monochrome mode - so at least you see approximately how image looks as BW. On film camera you see the coloured live image . That means you need to get a good understanding what contrast will be on the recorded image based on the colours you see. Not necessarily colour contrast will translate into BW contrast (unless you know how to use bw filters).
One thing i like to use to help with this is shooting with a color filter (red,yellow,blue) and especially if it’s quite strong it helps me to focus more on the lighting in composition rather than getting distracted by the color
@@DarioSpeed. I'm glad it's working for you. I would only caution, that strong filters can, in some situations, affect the composition significantly, so that taking the photograph without the filter will produce a very different result. as with exposure basics, one needs to understand the principles of filtration.
İts not about juts film but i realized that some times i wonder aroud for a photo that saves my day ,photo thati can plasure my self but in the end of the day i realize i just create constant prasure on me and lose a poasible good photos , its realy important to be paitant and wait for the moment to come
/sigh This video is…..not bad. I’m not sure the message in the right place. The intentions are pure and I can detect the more empathy for photographer’s who are not getting to results they want from the medium. That said, this video is not actually helpful. It reads as a list of donts instead of exploratory options versus standard “best practice”. A discourse on how choices are made and relevant questions photographers should ask themselves when practicing would have carried this video and subsequent conversations much further. I’d tell anyone talk just about all of this with a grain of salt. Not to suggest the advice is poor but it’s only relevant if a photographer is without their own thought process, ideas about creativity, and goals.
The algorithm put you in my feed this morning. This is the clearest explanation I've heard on this topic so I liked and subscribed.
Awesome, thank you! Glad thee feed found me 😁
same here
At 69, I'm quite an ageing photographer now, but my advantage is that I started with film and developed it myself. And that was at a time when film and paper were still affordable. I shot digitally for the first time in 1993 (with a Kodak DCS-100 system) and that was the start of the digital age for me - I sold all my analog cameras and only worked digitally. But at some point I wanted to go back to my roots and ended up with a Nikon F4s again, doing analog projects that I had already done digitally. Despite my knowledge of film, I had to dig deep to reactivate the old knowledge. I can imagine that users who are used to digital will have their difficulties with film at the beginning. You can't expect to take better photos with film, it's just a special art form and should only be used for that. In addition, really good negative film (I consider the Kodak Tri-X 400 to be such a film developed in an Ilford developer) seems almost unaffordable. A little tip for people with less money - the AGFA APX-100 and 400 are affordable and developed in Ilford Ilfosol 3 are also quite high-contrast and fine-grained enough. It is best to use tilt development.
Can't remember what the DCS-100 system was like but my first dslr was like 6 megapixels and thought it was crazy good :)
Great videos, as always. How do you know where are the shadow areas compared to the grey values on the tone curve? The grey scale moves if the image is underexposed or pushed
Thank you! The curve moves in relation to the zone scale.
Having shot film quite poorly for three decades - I found the "shooting on film doesn't make it good" part of this vid particularly relevant. Many of the new-to-film photographers have the mentality and I can't help but laugh when someone is showing a photo that has missed the basics of good photography and follow it up with "and I shot that on fiiiiiilllllmmmm." In the last couple years the social media groups for film photography have been over-ran with new film shooters (a good thing) who ask "what went wrong" or "did the lab mess up my film" because they didn't bother reading the manual for their camera and/or take the time to learn the basics of all photography. I don't mean this in a "mean" way - it is just entertaining to watch the process/struggle in regards to something that was so commonplace before their time. I have helped out several new-to-film photographer at a couple local parks frequented by photographers - and always like pointing out that it isn't as hard to get serviceable pictures with film - after all their Uncle Bob took thousands of decent ones with no more knowledge than turn the camera on, line up the two halves in the eye-hole and make sure the meter-thingy is in the middle. The "Ah-ha" moment once they understand the basics of aperture and exposure and it's relation is fun to see - and then the realization it applies to digital as well and gives them a lot of creative control over their photography. This was an excellent video, very well explained!
Thank you, with digital you can skim by without really knowing whats going on with exposure. Like you say once someone has the lightbulb go off. it is cool to see!
Also, a lot of beginners start out with cameras without a degree of control on at least one of the corners of the exposure triangle. Either the camera does one thing only, and they meet the ideal conditions sometimes but not others, or the camera's automation intuits exposure as intended sometimes and not others. So I can get why sometimes it's difficult for them to pinpoint and what is and isn't working. A dslr or mirrorless has everything you need to learn all of the tenets and film won't automatically make you better, but depending on the film camera, it can force you to become aware of the fundamentals.
There's a lot of crap advice on the internet about film shooting so it's good to see someone who knows what he's talking about from experience. I know you know what you're talking about because I'm of the same generation with an almost identical experience.
Yes! choose a good quality, readily available black and white film that's been around for decades, like Ilford FP4 and learn how to drive that before venturing into something else. If you drive a different car everyday you're never going to learn how to drive any of them well.
Same goes for cameras, get a straightforward, manual exposure camera in whatever format takes your fancy and stick with it. Don't fall into the trap of buying every fully auto point and shoot on the planet because they are cheap to buy. You'll be chasing your own ass forever and get nowhere.
I see a lot of crap black and white images on social media. Often low contrast and flat. I suspect that there's a lot of newbies out there who have never seen a real good quality sparkly print in real life.
Visiting art galleries with real prints is a good idea.
Seeing a really good black and white print really can change how you look at things ( and make you want to throw in the towel 😂) hopefully inspire you and let you know what’s possible!
you can also add the fact that social media, for black and white, is not the real end of the process... ? printing is in my opinion the end of the circle for the whole black and white processing, lot of stuff to learn and compare, but some books hit the point with really good exemple on how to expose all the way to the printing process. it can be a eal rabbit hole. and for some, it can be frightening (sorry for my english)
@@postgarodegoogle2389 I agree with everything you say. I was talking specifically about UA-cam photographers who go online to give advice to novice photographers. This UA-cam channel is excellent and I cannot fault it. It reflects my own 40 years of experience. However many UA-cam channels are nowhere near the same standard as this one. Specifically those that advice use of multiple film stocks from the get go and complain about the cost of lab processing black and white film. These UA-camrs are paying a lab to process their film and then setting themselves up as mentors, really?
your channel is a goldmine! Thank you!
@@opart Thank you 🙏
Great advice. One or two films, one film developer, one paper developer. I've worked to that pretty much consistently for over 40 years. I had to switch from Tri-X to HP5+ around 10 years ago because of cost, and from Acros to FP4+ for the same reason, and from Dektol to Ilford Bromophen a couple of years ago when Dektol became impossible to get in the UK reliably. Otherwise I don't want any surprises with my materials, I want to know what I'm going to get, and that consistency comes with sticking with what you know. And I always spot meter and then deliberately overexpose by half a stop or so. That gives me negatives which will print nicely with my enlarger at grade 2, 2.5 or 3 99% of the time, and with enough shadow and highlight detail that I can choose how I want a print to look with lots of options to change the outcome. This saves money on test strips and test prints because I can usually hone in on the right printing exposure very quickly. Printing my early negatives can be frustrating before I settled on this consistency, as there is a lot of variation in negative density and development, and each print can be a real challenge.
Yeah, I have a heap of negatives from long ago that are a nightmare! SOunds like we have very close to the exact thought process and consistency...
Great video. I’ve been shooting film on and off for 40years and found and It very informative. So I’ll be watching your other videos. 👍
Awesome, great to hear! Thanks!
Great tips that are not mentioned enough! 👏🏾👏🏾
👍👍👍
I usually try not to go below 2x focal length for shutterspeed - especially for super tele photo stuff without IS. With my 300mm lens I will almost certainly use a tripod if I don't have any point for anchoring myself. The journey of shooting and printing film has been an absolute eye opener for me so far, just the best experience there is.
Experience is the same for me, I suppose the shutter speed can depend on how steady you are, how much light you actually have and… how much coffee 😁
Thank you for your expertise. Had I had the opportunity to see this content 12 months ago I could have saved a lot of headaches and failures. Long story short. I started my analogue journey 12 months ago. I was going back and forth between 35mm and 120, ISO 50 and ISO400, Rodinal and Ilfosol, 1+8, 1+25 dev and stand dev as the only thing those days I was sure of is the black and white world and the square format. I also used several cameras. Finally, I settled at 35mm Nikon FE2 2.5/35mm for flexible shoots and 120 with Weltax 6x6 folding camera for lonely, meditative photo walks. My film of choice today is FP4+ at ISO100, developer is Rodinal at 1+25 (8 minutes) that provides excellent results on 120, but a bit too grainy results on 35mm (that I crop to square format too). Finally, a sturdy Manfrotto tripod made a great job, not only by stabilizing the shot but by forcing me to think twice as well. Results? My keeper rate increased dramatically, beyond any expectation. And the garins! I started loving them.
Awesome to hear! Consistency does mean a lot, especially with film. Glad you are getting results you are after 👍
Lots of good practical advice. I really appreciate the time you took to distinguishing "under exposing" and "pushing" film. The subtle nuance was so much easier to explain when you used the tone curve diagram. Until your video, I wouldn't have known how I would have verbalized it.
Thanks, the visual does make it easier to explain for sure 👍
Really enjoyed this video. Great advice. Well done Matthew.
Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it.
wow thanks a lot. this is realy well explained. I just srated with film and I have to say I still fight the exposure. Is there a good way to measure underexposure for a night shots. I try to measure exposure for my lights but it seems still bit too low contrast for me. sometimes I get the blacks right but not all the time. I also use a mobile app for this. maybe I need a proper lightmeter? Thanks.
Metering at night can be tricky. Tripod can be necessary depending on what and how you are shooting. Most light meters will struggle in real darkness as there is no light to read, but having a “real” meter is probably a good idea. If you ever change phones etc… things could be totally different and can help to have a standard to judge by 👍
The focal length guide is the best advice. If you are coming from digital, you are accustomed to auto ISO, regardless of stabilisation.
Also the flip from protecting highlights to protecting shadows.
This has been my biggest challenge, and I have been overexposing half a stop on the last few rolls, but waiting to see the results. I generally like to push HP5 1 stop for added contrast. As an added bonus, this increases shutter speed, for less blurry images.
Depending on your final out put you can still overexpose a bit and give more development for the conrast push. Curve of the film does not change much with exposure and you can always print down.
I've been using the same film for years. Since I also developed it myself, I have the opportunity to optimize the development for my use. Initially, I developed it neutrally, but later in the darkroom I had to choose a higher contrastfilter that also made the grain appear stronger. In the meantime I have optimized my development so that I have a very good contrast on the negative, but also details in highlights and shadows are preserved. The grain on the negative has also become smaller. Later in the darkroom, I can use neutral contrast filters or even low contrast filters. Even on large pictures of ~1.5m diagonal, a subtle grain can be seen, which is hardly noticeable. All this from 35mm film and in medium format even sharper and richer in detail.
Nice 👍 👍👍
Really appreciate the Bruce Barnbaum style breakdown on exposure curves and really love the chart mapped to zone system - like you said it's all about putting in the reps so sometimes even when I think I've visualized a photo well and done all the light readings, I'm still disappointed with how those values landed for the exact reason of not having enough tonal separation.
If it's at all possible I would love more videos just geeking out/breaking down characteristic curves based on different stocks and developers. Thanks again!
Thanks for the feedback, it's definitely a topic I can geek out about more!
Great advice. I always struggle with exposure compensation and have to think about it with bright and dark backgrounds. When I think about it I struggle a lot 😂
My B&W experience has been pretty funky in general. It's not something I shoot with digital cameras, as the cameras I have don't have the profile, so I find visualizing monochrome really hard. I do end up with good images on almost every roll though somehow. I usually have color and B&W loaded in two cameras at the time and I choose which one to shoot depending on the weather and time of day, or mood.
Excellent coverage of critical elements of how film behaves. Would be interested to get your take on two points. First, measuring the light: both in-board camera and external meters can vary in how they measure. Get to know your meter's behavior and how each reads light to give a gray tone (e.g. blacks read gray, so it overexposes; white reads gray so it underexposes. A miss here dooms the shot. I get the impression from a myriad of posts that people really don't understand how a meter works and it leads to errors. Second, some sources assert that box speed often varies from "true" speed. For example, HP5 box speed is 400, but many recommend shooting it at 250. TriX seems to work well shot at 200. I shoot this way and have found my negatives print and scan nicely, presuming I get the exposures correct. But, I wonder if this is more about my preference for higher contrast rather than flatter negatives (which is easier to print?). And, of course, there is important interplay with scene contrast, exposure and development time/agitation. Lots of moving parts, yeah?
Have had a few requests on this topic so will give it some though. All fascinating stuff!
Michael Kenna shoots (mostly) Tri-X, unless he's traveling and can't get it then he shoots whatever is locally available. He actually sends his film out for processing. He might specify d_76/ID-11 for 11 minutes, but I got the impression he didn't really care what they processed it in. But he does like surprises! 🙂 I'm partial to Ilford FP4+ in D-76/ID-11 for 11 minutes. My film experimenting days are long behind me. (Except for sheet film, 4x5 is a great way to try a new film, because you can always shoot your standard film alongside it. (I guess you could do the same thing with a Hasselblad back...)
I have read that about Michael Kenna as well and it makes sense. He has a lot of confidence in his ability get out of the negative what he wants in the darkroom.
I’ve learned to deal with a lot of different “situations” with negatives in the darkroom but if I can make it easier on myself I will 👍.
Also for me sending my B&W to a lab is not worth the risk. I’ve heard many stories of scratching & issues. But if you have a good quality lab this should never happen.
Not saying this is the new standard but most people now just want the scans… not an issue if there is a scratch.
Just found your channel, UA-cam suggested. Great video, can you take this one a bit further, showing how you meter a scene for black & white. I’m now subscribed!
Will be doing more exposure in the future!!! Thanks 🙏
My biggest struggle has been exposing properly. Learning where on the zone to place my shadows and dark textured objects and in high contrast situations. And getting stuck trying to find the right stock for me
Will be doing more things with exposure coming in the future!
Solid foundation information i this vid. One film, one developer, meter carefully, and when in doubt, overexpose a bit. Stay very consistent in your development process (time, temps, dilutions).
Yeah, that consistency is key 👍
Thanks for this video. Where I screw up the most, is under exposure. Have a great New Year.
It’s a common problem. Especially trying to figure out exposure, think critically etc… Have a great New Year too!
Man, this is an excellent explanation!
Glad you think so! 👍
Great advice.
I just shot a roll of 120 Ilford FP4+ at 800iso as I mistakenly thought I had loaded HP5+ (and I needed the extra speed on an overcast day). Should be interesting when I develop it later today. Luckily I also shot a roll of HP5 so I should have some 'normal' images.
Try drawing out dev with minimal minimal agitation possibly stand dev... and maybe go for a Phenidone based developer... IE. Microphen.
Then throw some salt over your shoulder and stand on your head!
But seriously give it a long development with as much time for the shadows to develop as possible. while exhausting the highlight development (minimal agitation, more dillute, stand) Good luck!!!
I like pushing film mainly because I got like 16 rolls of ilford pan 100, and I find 100 to be too slow with my lenses so I end up pushing it to 400.
In that case, to better utilize the smaller dynamic range should I make sure to expose for the midtones and compose it so that my main subject is there and not expect detail at the extremes?
It is a bit scene dependent. but that would be a good approach and just realize that your shadows will tend to go black and use this to your advantage. 👍
Learning to shoot black and white will definitely help you shoot on film. If you have been shooting digital learning to do black and white conversions or using built in b+w simulations can make you a better film shooter.
Yeah I think it all helps and they feed off each other... but starting to see things in black and white takes consistent effort
Great advise. Eliminate the variables, use the same film, developer, agitation and temperature.
Yeah that consistency is key 👍
Thank you for your excellent “mistakes” series. It is extremely important to know the errors. For me underexposing the film is actually the biggest mistake. Your explanation of this is perfect! To avoid camera shake, I often used exposure times that were too short. The result was underexposed negatives, the deep shadows were practically non-existent. There's no way to fix this. The print from such a negative appears gray and weak. With a film test according to Ansel Adams you practically always only get half the ISO sensitivity. To avoid underexposure, I halve the ISO value and apply the simple and safe sunny 16 rule. I found that overexposure, however, is not a problem.
The second problem is overdevelopment. This makes the negative too contrasty. It's very difficult to bring it on paper. The combination of both mistakes: underexposure + overdevelopment = pushing.
Yup. Can be amazing look for the right look and image. But best to get a full tonal range on the negative first… can always crank contrast in the darkroom too 😁
Hi Matt
What's the tripod you are using with the hassy ? Peak design ? I need a better travel/hiking tripod . I don't know why people lark around with all these novelty repackaged films ? Give my HP5 or FP4 any day , as for saving a couple of dollars by using cheap stuff , I feel given the time investment, cost of fuel to get to a locations why save a couple of dollars on the most important thing . Its like fishing , it doesn't matter if the rod is carbon fibre or 50 year old fibreglass if the hook on the end of the line in blunt or snaps easily !
It’s the Peak design. Carbon fiber. I really love it. Comes in so handy. If I can use my other ones I do but this is so light and portable can always have it with.
Hasselblad works surprisingly well on it… might want to be careful with that 250mm though.
Yeah HP5 is a great standard and trying to warm up to FP4 again 😁
@@Distphotodoes the peak tripod have a spike option ?
@ Not that I know of… the feet do not appear to detach either.
Definitely have noticed the preconception that being on film somehow intrinsically makes it better. I started doing both digital and film photography in 2002, and back then many viewed digital as a bother in that people shot so indiscriminately. I know I did too. But alas, not every photo is worth taking, much less worth posting for others to see. It's a bit funny that now new film shooters are doing so much of the same now, but it being film somehow supposedly makes it better.
I understand why… I always want to know if an image (especially on B&W) was shot on film or digital. It shouldn’t (and doesn’t) matter but I understand what goes into making both so I do give more clout to the film images. But how good the actual image is really has no bearing on the format.
I've taken maybe 14 rolls over these past few months of this new hobby of mine. It just occurred to me watching y our video that I am doing it backwards.
I drop my film off to be developed and scanned. I have always requested to get the standard resolution scans because it is a bit cheaper. Why would I spend extra money on these novice photos? I haven't gotten prints yet either.
But I probably should at least be getting the higher resolution scans, right? Then I won't have to wonder if the photos are terrible because of the scan resolution or because of me. It will obviously be me! :)
I don’t think what you’re doing is a bad way to go about it. As long as you can judge if it’s a good image and maybe post it to Insta. Then if you find a great image you love you can scan it have it scanned at a high resolution for print 👍
my biggest mistake, still happening today, is to underexpose some shots. Mostly in bad light conditions. Don't know if my light meters (yes, two, an old one and a new one) do not work that well in that cases and give me wrong numbers (but they differ 1/2 stop on all readings antyime) or my film stock (Fomapan 100) does need more overexposure in low light conditions. But my shots then are low-contrast and almost flat, even when pushing and self-developing. And I like my pictures to have the maximum depth of detail. But I'm still learning and experimenting, at the end of the day the joy of the whole process is still pleasing, despite the unsatisfying outcome sometimes.
I use several meters as well (for convenience) I think it would be best to just use one. But... So I try to stay consistent from camera to camera so I can understand / prepare for whats happening. You nailed it. Having fun is the most important!
I have problems with HP5 looking good. I even shot one roll 1 stop over exposed. There's just too much grain in mine. I bought another roll to try again. I sent the other 2 rolls to camera stores. Different stores but same result. I love Tmax100 though. Yes I'm one of those trying different stock. But I grew up with film. We just had point and shoot cameras with no controls. And I'm used to matrix metering in my digital cameras. I'm learning how to meter with my film cameras to get the exposure correct. I'm learning to point to the shady areas to expose for the shadows. I'm used to raising the shadows with digital so I get a little sloppy with my exposure. You can't do that with film. I also like the versatility of FP4 125. I can shoot it at 500 and push it 2 stops.
@@carlmcneill1139 If you like FP4 I would stick with that, it is one of the best. Tmax is great too 👍
Silver based photography is about creating image density on film as a light block out for printing on photographic paper .
Exactly, and understanding that can help you get better results.
Of course, there is reversal (slide) film, where this works backwards, but for all negatives, this is true.
I feel like I have a lot of images that would be great if I could take them into the darkroom and do some dodging and burning. I don't have the space and I can't find a community darkroom anywhere in my area so I'm scanning them at home. I'm just so bad at editing digitally and while I could probably learn, I find that editing just makes me sad, bored and grumpy. Still, I almost always have at least one, usually two to three pretty great shots per roll so that ratio isn't too bad. I just wish I could save those few almost great shots that lack the separation they need to really stand out.
First, I am old enough to have started my photography when digital was not available.I also never got interested in that, because it would mean changing my darkroom in a computer, what I don-t want to do. I do both color and black & white prints in my darkroom. So, the problems digital shooters have when trying film do not apply. Most obvious are stupid mistakes - such as setting the film speed wrong, or thinking the light in your darkroom is off, when it is not. Loadind the film in a way it doesn't feed. These thing still happen, even with years of experience. Screwing up totally with chemistry, such as wrong time, or wrong mixing of developer. Pouring the fixer in first. There is an unlimited amount of small mistakes you can do that ruin your film totally. Having a Ilford Multigrade filter 3 in the enlarger drawer when printing color and not understanding why the prints are green.
Those green prints will get ya 😂 😂😂
Great video as always! I also like Kit Young's photos, but actually I think he doesn't push the film and just do all the magic in the darkroom?
I’m not sure, definitely could crush the shadows and increase contrast in the darkroom. Either way his images are incredible!
I have issues with grey tones, they have a lack of contrast, they are a bit flat. I tend to overexpose a bit
More development could help or giving a yellow or orange filter a try…
@@Distphoto I will try more dev, thank you
Definitely swapping films has been a mistake for me. I have some great images with HP5+ and should just keep going with that tbh... but I have a heap of colour film to shoot now so back to b&w in a bit.
Stick with what you know works well!
En película hay que exponer para las sombras y revelar para las luces, así se ha dicho siempre. Saludos.
i
¡En efecto!
Interesting the read the comments. One person thanks you for sharing all the mistakes. I think it's vital. The worst teaching, generally speaking, is limited to "Want this? Do this, then do this, then do this." And what if the result doesn't work out? How, then, does a student determine what went wrong? If we don't know how something works, we are limited in our ability to control it. That's one reason I don't try to repair electrical or plumbing problems in my house. But I can look at a negative and a print and know what the problem is and where to start looking for the cause. Not enough education offers this.
Well, I’ve definitely made all the mistakes… Now I do know what I’m looking for and what a good negative looks like 👍
@@Distphoto Oh, I've made mistakes you probably haven't even dreamed of.
thank you very much.
You are welcome!
Honestly the biggest problems I would have when I was shooting B&W in my twenties was money 😅
Still is 🤷🏻♂️
Unless you do it all yourself, properly exposed films come back with no shades in the sky, which is really disappointing. As opposed to what they say in books and videos there is no difference here between digital and films. Digitals nowadays actually handle highlights better than films. (Using a filter can be an option but I still need to decide if I like it. I'm not a big fan of a polarizer with digital photos at least.)
Also I prefer black to grey in dark areas in the images. So I will continue underexposing the films.
@@masaradon8448 I think you have to consider the final output too. If printing film can handle a TON on the high end & if you give more exposure you can always print down ( if printing )
I am guilty of using many films and thinking anything shot must be good because it is film! What I started doing is using my digital camera (in the black and white viewing mode) to see what happens. Amazing what is garbage in digital color is garbage in digital black and white - which is garbage in film black and white. But if the digital black and white photo has merit - I break out the film camera.
@@markrawlings1496 It’s easy to do… I am guilty as well.
The digital black and white approach is a good way to visualize!!!
❤❤
🙏🙏🙏
The issue for the ones that learn to shoot the black and white on film - is visualisation. The digital camera can be set to the monochrome mode - so at least you see approximately how image looks as BW. On film camera you see the coloured live image . That means you need to get a good understanding what contrast will be on the recorded image based on the colours you see. Not necessarily colour contrast will translate into BW contrast (unless you know how to use bw filters).
Yeah this takes a lot of practice… and is always challenging. Going to make a video with some ways to overcome this challenge 👍
One thing i like to use to help with this is shooting with a color filter (red,yellow,blue) and especially if it’s quite strong it helps me to focus more on the lighting in composition rather than getting distracted by the color
@@DarioSpeed. I'm glad it's working for you. I would only caution, that strong filters can, in some situations, affect the composition significantly, so that taking the photograph without the filter will produce a very different result. as with exposure basics, one needs to understand the principles of filtration.
İts not about juts film but i realized that some times i wonder aroud for a photo that saves my day ,photo thati can plasure my self but in the end of the day i realize i just create constant prasure on me and lose a poasible good photos , its realy important to be paitant and wait for the moment to come
/sigh
This video is…..not bad. I’m not sure the message in the right place. The intentions are pure and I can detect the more empathy for photographer’s who are not getting to results they want from the medium. That said, this video is not actually helpful. It reads as a list of donts instead of exploratory options versus standard “best practice”. A discourse on how choices are made and relevant questions photographers should ask themselves when practicing would have carried this video and subsequent conversations much further. I’d tell anyone talk just about all of this with a grain of salt. Not to suggest the advice is poor but it’s only relevant if a photographer is without their own thought process, ideas about creativity, and goals.
Appreciate the feedback, doing my best 🤷🏻♂️
@ You’re doing well, I’m just concerned the discourse, even self discourse, portion of the creation process cannot be overlooked. And it always is…