I've been shooting with an M6 for about a year. For general travel photography I like shooting slides (mostly Velvia and Provia). I am now trying my hand at street photography and am wondering if I should switch to a BxW film for street shooting. A BxW film would give me more exposure latitude. For my travel photography, I bracket exposures whenever possible so I get the exposure I want. Bracketing is hard with street photography. Also, BxW would give me more latitude indoors with different types of lighting. Finally, the look of BxW seems appropriate from a visual perspective, although there are times when color does add to the image.

I would welcome the thoughts and experiences of others. What film or films do you use for street photography -- and why?

Thank you for your help.

-- David Enzel (dhenzel@vei.net), August 26, 2001

Answers

David,

For B/W street photography, I use TRI-X. Its a very versatile film, and can be easily pushed to 1600 without any huge loss in performance. This would help cover most low light situations. However, anything above 8R gets quite grainy. I love it though. Its your call.

-- joel (joel_low12@yahoo.co.uk), August 26, 2001.

I'm thankful for the lattitude of Tri-X and HP5+. Street photography requires very quick shooting-- you might have time to compose, focus, set exposure, and shoot, but it takes great luck to be able to pull off all four at once for a good picture. I can zone focus and compose pretty quickly but if the light is changing I find myself sometimes missing the correct exposure by a stop or two, and the films I mentioned are very forgiving in those instances.

-- JM Woo (wooismyid@yahoo.com), August 26, 2001.

Color negative also has terrific lattitude. Lately, I've been shooting a lot of Kodak's Supra 800. It's cheap and it scans well. A lot of folks are shooting color, and then converting to grey scale with digital if they feel the image works better in B&W. You can even try the effects of different filters by selecting color channels. I've been impressed by the work of this Australian: Neming I shoot a lot of Ilford's XP-2 (rated at 200) and Fuji's Neopan 1600, rated at 1200 and developed in Xtol. I find the XP-2 has wonderful tonality, and really holds detail in the highlights. Neopan has the best ratio of speed to grain.

-- Phil Stiles (Stiles@metrocast.net), August 26, 2001.

Sorry, his name is Andrew Netmeth. A great Leica resource in his own right.

-- Phil Stiles (Stiles@metrocast.net), August 26, 2001.

NEMETH. (This is reminding me of the tar baby story!)

-- Phil Stiles (Stiles@metrocast.net), August 26, 2001.

learn the hyperfocal distance for 3 or 4 f stops

use one film (tri-x) and one speed till you have it down

WHY??? tri-x is every where and has be in use for years by useing just one film you'll laearn how to control it

Street photogaphy is the most fun part of the system...

-- Tom Hipple (elizabethmmg@msn.com), August 26, 2001.

XP-2 Plus is the best film for street shooting. Anything with less grain or better sharpness will be too slow for the quick action required in street shooting. Anything faster will be too grainy and lack sharpness. I shoot it at 200-250.

-- Bill Mitchell (bmitch@home.com), August 26, 2001.

The new Portra B&W from Kodak is supposed to process and print on the Portra color channel in the automated machines and look like conventional B&W when printed on color paper, something which requires a more knowledgeable employee to do with XP2 or T400CN.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), August 26, 2001.

While I like the old B&W emulsions like Tri-X & HP5, I also like the newer "T-grain" films like Delta 400 & TMAX--they have less visible grain & higher resolution & I think they push better as well (but you do have to be more precise in your processing).

-- Chris Chen (furcafe@cris.com), August 26, 2001.

As to C-41, I would 2nd Mr. Stiles's recommendation of Supra 800. It has very f ine grain for a high-speed film & is optimized for scanning. I like Supra 400 for the same reasons.

-- Chris Chen (furcafe@cris.com), August 26, 2001.

I've been very pleased with TMAX CN 400- Kodak's first C41 film. I'd like to try the Portra as soon as I can find some. I used Kodak's 800 Max film a few years ago and was unimpressed. However, Fuji's 800 (I thought it was called Supra?) is really fantastic.

I'm about to check out the Polynesian Festival in Santa Cruz will pack CN400 and Reala 100.

tw

-- Tse-Sung Wu (tsesung@yahoo.com), August 26, 2001.

My most-used film for street/candid shooting is HP5+ rated at EIs from 250 to 1000. It's usually used in the late afternoon/dusk or for well-lit indoor areas. While it's a bit grainy, it's also very, very sharp. Delta 3200 comes in second, generally used at EI 3200 but sometimes at 6400. Perfect for available darkness shooting. It's grainy, but has a beautiful tonality. Even when pushed hard, contrast is well-controlled enough that most negatives don't require heroic measure to get a good print.

If I'm shooting mid-day, I'll use Delta 100 and FP4+. I'll often overexpose/pull process FP4+ when the light's really harsh. Delta 100 works best for maximum sharpness; FP4+ has unbeatable skin tones.

Note that I may be one of the few street shooters on the planet who uses wide apertures the vast majority of the time and actually focuses on each subject rather than zone focusing. Using the slower films gives me the option of narrow DOF in bright conditions.

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), August 26, 2001.

I agree HP5+ has a wondeful tone [printed on ilford warmtone paper]. I use FP4 in bright light situations so I can control the aperture. I have found Neopan 1600 good at this and 3200. I think Tmax3200 and delta 3200 are crap in very low light [sorry to any fans] I am trying Tri-x, but I think I will end up using HP5 the most, pushed to 1600 if necessary it is still very good, Neopan at this speed just has more punch and range, but with more obvious grain.

-- Richard (richard@designblue.co.uk), August 26, 2001.

Mike, I like your style! I also usually try to minimize DoF in my street photography. IMHO, I think way too many street shooters rely on the "shotgun" approach of small apertures, wide DoF, & zone focusing.

"Note that I may be one of the few street shooters on the planet who uses wide apertures the vast majority of the time and actually focuses on each subject rather than zone focusing. Using the slower films gives me the option of narrow DOF in bright conditions. "

-- Chris Chen (furcafe@cris.com), August 26, 2001.

Another vote for Tri-X! There has to be a reason why everyone from Salgado to Gibson, and yes it was Jeanloup Sieffs favorite film. Incredible exposure latitude, it has the longest exposure range of any B&W film made except perhaps old Double X. Definitely grainier than the new T-grain films, but if lack of grain was all it's about I'd switch to medium format in a minute!

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), August 26, 2001.

After a few years, I have standardised on only two colour negative films for my candid photography: (1) Kodak Supra 100 for daylight, outdoors work. Extremely fine grain and very sharp, easy to scan too.

(2) For indoors, low-light work it's Fuji Press 800, finer grain than NGHII 800 and cheaper, although the trade-off is a slight increase in contrast (which is actually a benefit when shooting under flouro).< P> For a recent commercial job (a museum shoot for their www site) I tried Fuji Press 1600, but found it to be junk. Very grainy, no lattitude and the only time the film behaved itself was when it was over-exposed by one stop(!) Sheesh, may as well have used the 800 Press!

For examples of the kind of candid photography I do, see the following link on my 4020.net site:

Everyday Life

-- Andrew Nemeth (azn@nemeng.com), August 26, 2001.

This is all personal choice...as you can see...in the early 1960's I used Tri-X and then in the 1980's started to use the newer T grain films. I didn't like them and tried Ilford HP5 and continued through HP5+ until recently and now I'm back to Tri-X.

-- Steven Alexander (alexpix@worldnet.att.net), August 26, 2001.

A little help with nomenclature, please. When respondents speak of Tri-X for B&W, are they referring to Kodak Tri-X Pan TX400? Also, who are the maufacturers of HP5+ and XP-2 Plus? Thanks.

-- Max Wall (mtwall@earthlink.net), August 26, 2001.

Tri-X Pan (TX) (ISO 400) is the ONLY Tri-X available in 35mm. HP5+, XP2 Super, FP4, Delta 3200 are made by Ilford.

I enter another vote for Tri-X for B&W street photography, followed by HP5+. HP5+ has beautiful mid-tone tonality, but Tri-X just has the right "look" overall. Hard to explain.

-- Robert Schneider (rolopix@yahoo.com), August 27, 2001.

Ask twenty photographers get twenty answers. Here's no. 21: Ilford Delta Pro 400. Period.

Ilford's XP1, XP2, XP2 Plus do have their place in my b&w photography, too, offering standardized 1-hour C41 development services and being available all over the globe. And, talking about chromogenics, the new Kodak Portra 400 arrived in Switzerland these days and I just popped in my first roll. Will report.

-- Lutz Konermann (lutz@konermann.net), August 27, 2001.

"XP1, XP2, XP2 Plus do have"

Sorry, XP1 and XP2 "DID HAVE" - as they are no longer available...;o)

-- Lutz Konermann (lutz@konermann.net), August 27, 2001.

I like Delta 400, Tmax 100, and the new Portra 400 C41 B&W emulsions. For color, I like Portra 400 NC. For slides I like Provia 100F (RDPIII).

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), August 27, 2001.

My best all purpose black and white film for street photography is Plus-X. The reasons being I just like the look of it for general pupose exposures. I use a Leica M6 Classic and either a 50mm Summicron or a 35mm Summaron lens. I almost always use either a medium yellow or yellow/green filter for improved tonality. Try either or both and I am sure you will like the results.Don't forget to use a lens shade!

-- John Alfred Tropiano (jat18@psu.edu), August 27, 2001.

I've pretty much standardized on Ilford's 'old technology' films for tonal range - I use all three (Pan F+, FP4+, HP5+) because of Leica's upper limit of 1/1000 second so that I can stick with the sweet apertures around 5.6 as the light gets brighter - with the Hexar's 4000th I can shoot FP4 most of the time at f/4 even in full sunlight. Fuji 1600 is nice for available darkness - looks like HP5 pushed but only takes 7 minutes to process (vs. 17 minutes for HP5 at 1600).

But you should try shooting some Velvia as well, just to push the equipment and your skills to the limit...

...like this..

David Alan Harvey (of Nat. Geo) says he considers himself a 'color street photographer.'

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), August 27, 2001.

define street photography! if it means quick and dirty, hyper-focused snaps, without care, then use tri-x (as i do too). but slide film ain't hard to use either. you need not chase those red triangles in the viewfinder, rather take a mental note of the lighting conditions that you find yourself ambling thru. bright light, open shade, deep shade, interior, etc. use an incident meter, if you like, pre-set the exposure, and no problem. an easy trick is to meter the pavement with the m6 prior to the shot. concrete in the shade is really close to middle grey.

also, don't fear longer exposures, 1/30-1sec, in the street. not all street shots need to be at 1/1000 with 1600iso. try panning the subject, something that is so much fun with the m6. your "kill ratio" will be low, but so what: as henri cartier-bresson said "you must go to the cow many times, get alot of milk, in order to make a little cheese.".

cheers!

erik

-- erik (erikcarlhanson@hotmail.com), February 19, 2002.

The one poster is right -- some of the best street photos are at slower speeds. I happen to like 1/60th. The little bit of blur makes all the difference... The best film is any 400 speed b&w film. I use the new Delta 400 pro as I find it to be 2/3rds of a stop faster than HP5+.

-- Russell Brooks (russell@ebrooks.org), February 20, 2002.