Jump to content

Plus-X vs. FP4


Recommended Posts

In the last few years, Kodak has made some significant improvements to its line of B&W films. Give them a try!

 

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products...0.1.4.4.8&lc=en

No arguements here. I just shot some Super-X on my Filmo to compare to the Plus-X I ran through my Super8. The Plus-X actually looked better, even tho it was on a much smaller format, very impressive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just shot some Super-X on my Filmo to compare to the Plus-X I ran through my Super8.

You probably mean Tri-X, because Super X pan (or was it Super XX pan) was discontinued ages and ages ago.

 

- G.

Nope, I ment Super-X. US Army WWII issue. 40 meters unshot. Felt like seeing what the results were. Pretty good for 60+ year old film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

EASTMAN 4-X Negative Film 5224/7224 is an oldie but goodie. EI500 in daylight, EI400 tungsten. Distinctive grain.

 

Plus-X 5231 Negative Film was first introduced in 1941.

 

Super-XX Type 1230 was introduced during the 1930's.

 

Other recent discussion:

 

http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...hp?showtopic=60

 

http://www.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/archiv...ors/toland.html

 

http://www.hollywood.com/celebs/bio/celeb/1676708

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah. EASTMAN 4-X Negative Film 5224/7224 is an oldie but goodie. EI500 in daylight, EI400 tungsten. Distinctive grain.

I almost bought some reels of 4-X B&W film, but the guy selling it was asking too much. So I got the Super-X instead. I am still surprised at how good the Super-X's results were. I should telecine some clips from it to show you all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Are you SURE it is "Super-X"? What is the film code number? If it starts with a "12.." it is likely dangerous NITRATE film. Be careful!!! Nonetheless, quite a testimonial for the keeping qualities of the film. Was it refrigerated?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you SURE it is "Super-X"?  What is the film code number?  If it starts with a "12.." it is likely dangerous NITRATE film.  Be careful!!!  Nonetheless, quite a testimonial for the keeping qualities of the film.  Was it refrigerated?

Emulsion No. 5205-24-08

 

Kodak Super-X Gun Camera Safety Film

 

Blue Base

 

"Develop before Oct 1945"

 

The man I bought it from claims it was kept refrigerated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Develop before Oct 1945"

 

The man I bought it from claims it was kept refrigerated.

Refrigerated? For how long, 69 years? Unlikely!

 

Anyway, even if it was deep frozen and kept at perfect humidity I'd doubt it wouldn't exhibit some fog and heavy grain. In addition to the natural course of events you also have problems like cosmic rays (I know, sounds cool doesn't it?) and ambient radiation.

 

- G.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Develop before Oct 1945"

 

The man I bought it from claims it was kept refrigerated.

Refrigerated? For how long, 69 years? Unlikely!

 

Anyway, even if it was deep frozen and kept at perfect humidity I'd doubt it wouldn't exhibit some fog and heavy grain. In addition to the natural course of events you also have problems like cosmic rays (I know, sounds cool doesn't it?) and ambient radiation.

 

- G.

Grainy, you can say that...... The fact that anything developed amazed me. I'd bought it just for the magazine it came in, and ran the film to test the camera. I call it a nice experiment, and even if it is foggy/hazy and grainer than an average florida beach, it served its purpose, showing that my camera still had life in it. As I said, I'll get some scans of it up so you can see *how* bad it came out. But, it still came out, the really amazing bit.

 

But this is off-topic. I was discussing it against some Plus-X run through my Super8 camera, which was not stored under any kind of ideal conditions. The cartridge the Plus-X was in turned out to be damaged, so when I tried to film with it the cartridge failed. But what frames did come out looked absolutely amazing. I'd figured folk would spot that I was comparing a brand-new "exp '04" film against very old "exp '45" film.

 

I'm planning on trying some Double-X and Plus-X in my 16mm next week, which would be a better comparison. Also comparing them both to Plus-X on my soon-to-be-modified Super8 cameras.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Chainsaw

If you've shot with the FP4 (125 ASA) in a still format then believe it or not you know what to expect. The MP version is the exact same emulsion as used with its still counterpart. All Ilford does is perf it with BH-1866 (for 35mm) and 1R-2994 and 2R-2994 perfs (for 16 and S16) so that it can run through MP cameras. This is also true of their HP5 (400 ASA) and SFX 200 stocks. The only downside to this approach is that these negs are not "pre-lubricated" to transport as smoothly through an MP camera as a stock that was specifically designed for MP use. In theory the worst you could expect from this would be torn emulsion, cracked or torn perfs, sticky emulsion, et al. I honestly prefer the look of Ilford MP stocks over those of Kodak and while I am aware of the minute hazards involved with shooting them I have never experienced a problem. I can think of several film schools that shoot Ilford stocks exclusively and I have never heard of any problems like this either, but the possibility still exists in perhaps a more pronounced form than with other stocks.

 

As I said previously if you have indeed shot with the FP4 in a still format then you unknowingly possessed the answer to your question. Besides the slight difference in grain when choosing between Kodak and Ilford it is purely an artistic preference. For me I typically eschew the flat, low-con, high-midtone look of B&W photography. At my most extreme I suppose you could compare my B&W style as the mutant child of Frank Miller's SIN CITY and Ed Merhige's BEGOTTEN. Heavy on contrast and shape and stylized lighting but low on fine detail. I find that I can get my "look" out of an Ilford stock a little easier, especially in the blacks. If I can make the blacks on film as dark as my soul then I am as happy as someone like me gets. ;)

 

One technical oddity of differential note between the Ilford and Kodak stocks are their red sensitivities. Kodak's general recommended compensation for shooting in tungsten (3200K) light is to reduce the effective speed of the stock by 1/3 stop. It is a little more complicated with Ilford. For their HP5 it is generally recommended that you compensate 2/3 to a full stop for tungsten environments and for the FP4 it ranges between 1/3 to 1/2 stop. For the SFX 200 which has extended red sensitivity there is no compensation needed.

 

p.s., If you intend on pushing your stock, I've found that the grain of the FP4 holds up extraordinarily well even after extended development equaling 2 & 1/2 stops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Jarin,

 

A couple years ago a feature we processed had very serious problems with Ilford 35mm B&W stock. The sensitometric quality was very good, but it just wouldn't run through the camera properly (no lubrication on the backing).

 

A couple of days into the production the switch to good old 5222 was made and all stability problems disappeared instantly.

 

Dirk DeJonghe

www.color-by-dejonghe.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Christian, thanks for the link - however, it didn't work. I don't think I'll have need for a ortho stock, but it'd be nice to see the options out there for upcoming work. I think I'll stick to filtering a panchro stock instead to achieve the specific look.

 

The director now sounds like he wants a somewhat grainy, very desaturated look as oppsed to completely monochrome and so I will continue any questions on a new post. Thanks, everyone.

 

-Jarin

 

ps: does anyone know if those very handsome 'International Paper' commercials of a few years ago were shot on Ilford stock? I assume they were, being that I.P. is Ilford's parent company.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I'll have need for a ortho stock, but it'd be nice to see the options out there for upcoming work.

 

Jarin, actually the Orwo/Filmotec arepanchromatic b&w stock, not orthochromatic. The link did not work? Please try this:

 

www.filmotec.de

 

and then click "english site".

 

They make duplicate and positive print stocks too, which can be used for special looks like tinting, toning, forced development and so on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

www.filmotec.de

 

and then click "english site".

"Currently, our product range incorporates black and white negative film for motion picture production, duplicating film, sound recording film and leaders for the processing and distribution business. Specialised film is also manufactured for bank security, traffic surveillance, and personal identification."

 

I guess they decided to give up on color!

 

I actually shot their color stocks, nothing special. But that was an old design.

 

- G.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GeorgeSelinsky wrote:

I guess they decided to give up on color!

 

That's not entirely correct because Filmotec is not the original ORWO company, which was a socialist production unit of the former German Democratic Republic (aka East Germany).

 

Before the Berlin Wall came down, ORWO cine films were manufactured mainly for the Eastern Europe markets. Their color negative and color positive stock required different processing (not ECN/ECP compatible), so it never spread in Western countries.

 

But ORWO black&white print stock was used widely in European labs because it was cheap and good, and when Agfa stopped producing b&w camera negative some years ago, ORWO b&w negative was a good alternative for filmmakers who did not like the look of Eastman stocks.

 

When the huge ORWO company closed because of inability to adapt to Western business practice, a small team of specialists decided to start a new company called Filmotec. They knew that there still was a market for b&w cine film, and after improving the classic ORWO emulsions, they specialised on black&white.

 

I will praise EKC for their vast range of fine product, but I feel, like many other cinematographers, that it is almost impossible by whatever means in developing/printing to get a classic b&w image with Plus-X and Double-X. It can be achived with newer ORWO stocks.

 

 

If you ever come to Germany (maybe Berlin), you may want to take a look at the Wolfen Film&Industrial Museum. This is the original pre-WW2 AGFA film factory where tripack colour negative was invented, and many machines and samples of half a century of film manufacture are on display.

 

Wolfen Film Museum (German site only)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...