I got some rolls back from the developer today. I had tried a few things in black and white using Ilford Delta 100 and Ilford XP2. I also did two rolls of color, Ektar 100 and Portra 160, to compare them. But, alas, I pulled the roll of Portra 160 out in the field to swap in a new roll and the worst confluence of events happened.
120, I have learned1, is not a cartrdige film like 135. It comes on a plastic spool and you wind it up on a second plastic spool. When you are done the second plastic spool holds the film and you just swap the spool that came with the last roll into the takeup spot for the next roll of film. Normally, the exposed 120 film gets sort of sealed closed when the roll is finished up. There is an adhesive leader that is just enough to keep it on the reel and tight. But this roll of Portra didn’t seal up for some reason and, of all the times to be clumsy, I chose THIS roll to drop. I watched it spring open and wipe out all the carefully exposed images I’d taken the previous week. Dammit. At least I got some shots from Ektar roll to look at.
Delta 100 is pretty much a standard, fine grain, decent contrast, forgiving range. I was given two rolls by the gentleman who sold me the camera and since they had the closest expiration date I started there. I am very pleased with what I got out of them and will certainly use this film again.
The XP2 is weird. It’s a 400 speed film and, though it’s black and white, it is processed with C-41 like color film. I was looking for a 400 speed when I bought it, and didn’t realize it was weird like that. I guess that is a benefit in some places, as it can be developed by any lab, but the folks I’m using charge the same for B&W as color, so really quality is quality. Grain is different than Delta 100, but it is supposed to be contrasty and saturated and still has good latitude.
The Ektar 100 makes very saturated, colorful images for a negative film. It still has more latitude than something like Velvia, where you’ll blow highlights completely more than a couple stops over, so I thought I’d try it for landscapes and sunsets. I’ve had mixed results there, but at least some success with my most recent roll. And I have learned that they aren’t kidding when they say saturated. It pops color and paints skin a bit red.
The Portra 160 is supposed to be fine grained and have much more honest colors. Good for portraits and skin tones, etc. Like I’d know. The first roll I shot I threw on the ground. I’ll have to report back after the next roll is done. Maybe I can convince Doug to stand in the sun again so I can get a portrait to compare as well.
I started with Delta. You remember my first film picture from the earlier post:
Very pleased with the qualities of even my marginal first attempts, I loaded a second roll and took some portraits of Doug and Bootsie. Then I spent a little time wandering the village on Tuesday night when it was reasonably barren so I could get some more difficult subjects.
Here are the portraits:
Nothing wrong with those other than my marginal skills at focusing. Plenty of detail in the shadows, excellent grain. Easy peasy. Here are the night shots, which tested the film much more, mostly because I was having trouble deciding how to meter in the dark2.
For Spin Record, I chose to meter the Spin sign as medium grey. It’s a yellow lettering on a brick wall, and that wall is way darker than medium grey. Probably should have gone at least one stop down, maybe two even, so I could get more detail inside the store and not blow out the Open sign. But it did hold a lot of detail in those highlights, even 4 stops over.
The Baba shot was better metered. I shot everything and decided it was all within a reasonable range, so I just metered to the tree leaves above the lights in the upper right. I got plenty of detail everywhere.
The spin photo, not so good. But I know how to do it better. The Baba photo, however, is stellar. Even in the dark where there’s no blue hour sky to make that corner interesting, I really like this photo. Especially the We’re Open sign, which gives it a very Clerks vibe.
For the XP2, I shot some at the lagoon. Most of the shots are of well lit reeds, which are beautiful in person but kind of boring as a photograph. The contrast is good, detail is good, grain is just fine for 400 speed. I did try a hard one, just to see the dynamic range, taking pictures through a shaded tree of an extremely bright background. It was able to handle four stops without too much trouble.
The sky isn’t blown out. It was just ridiculously clear that day. Like you could see forever clear.
I also shot these with Ektar (And with portra, which I then ruined) and was surprised at how much range Ektar had. Also with how ridiculously saturated it is.
For reference, those reeds are golden. Here are digital images from that day that are closer to the real color of the lagoon. The one through the tree is HDR and kind of sucks… I don’t like HDR. But it is presented here as a comparison so you can see how much Ektar pops the reds and greens.
Portraits of Doug and the dog definitely show how extremely saturated Ektar comes out.
The greens are rich and lush, and the colors of his shirt and vest really come through, but his skin is a bit ruddier than in real life. Good to know for future film choices.
I took a shot of Baba two nights ago. This was one week after the black and white one above, and taken during the blue hour as they were preparing to close up.
I took a digital shot about fifteen minutes later, and the Ektar is as saturated as the processed digital, but also has nicer highlights.
I have no idea what I did to get the color shift in the sign. I have auto white balance going on, so most these colors are probably more real to life, but I had to dial back the highlights in the digital image quite a bit to get those lamps in gamut and doing so maybe I pulled some of the blue out. It is a wonderful image, full of detail, that I’m very proud of, but the highlight range on that film is really cool. Even with the green tint from the streetlamp and the exaggerated reds, I dig it. The lamps in the restaurant just pop, and yet nothing is blown out on the sign or the white wall. The more I look at the film image the more I like it, so I intend to mat it and give it to the owners of the shop.3
1. Really, I just learned this two weeks ago. Don’t take my word on anything film related. It takes at least three or four weeks to become an expert on things like this.
2. This is mostly hubris. A wise man would shoot a few rolls in the daylight of a simple subject that could be metered by holding the Seikonic in the air and doing whatever it said. Dealing with new gear, in the dark, and trying to spot meter was too much to do at my skill level.
3. Again, hubris. But I don’t have a place for tons of prints so I pretend people care and give them away. Most people act like it’s a big deal, and I don’t have to watch when they toss it in a drawer and never look at it again so my heart still swells with pride.