Someone posted about the use of fine grain (25ISO) film.

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=00

Don Posted: February 01, 2002. "I pretty much quit using black and white film since I stopped going to black and white movies...." wgpinc@yahoo.com

This got me to thinking about the use of black and white film vs. color film with a Leica. It seems to me that black and white is the film of choice for Leica use (this statement is nothing more than my biased opinion and I am not 100% convinced of it myself).I have nothing against color photography with a Leica! In fact I see work from others in color and I am impressed at the textural colors rendered by Leicas.

I came from Hassie's and always lugged around flashes to use for fill but also to balance the film when indoors or outdoors when near street lights or lit signs. To me the word/name Leica means "AVAILABLE LIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY" and putting a flash into my Leica bag seems like a sin.

With color film in my Leica it seems to me that you would either have to carry a bag full of different types of film or a bag full of color balancing filters. Because going from Daylight to Tungsten to Gas Arc to Neon would pose a logistical nightmare for daylight film. Because of this I have never put color film into my Leica. I do not know if this logical or if I am missing something.

My questions are: 1) What film do your use most often, color or black and white.

2) If you use color...how do you handel photography around different light sources?

3) Do you think there is an IDEAL film for Leica's?

4) How often do you put a FLASH on your Leica?

Thanks Everybody,

Rob Schopke

-- Rob Schopke (schopke@attbi.com), February 01, 2002

Answers

I almost never use color film. The ideal film for the Leica is still Tri-X. I absolutely never use flash, but Robert Appleby's use of fill-flash with slide film is tempting me to give it a try sometime.

-- Tony Rowlett (rowlett@alaska.net), February 01, 2002.

I started with the Kodachromes, especially 25 and 64 but switched over to Velvia and Provia 100 and most recently added the new Provia F400. As for B&W, I agree with Tri-X...

-- Albert Knapp MD (albertknappmd@mac.com), February 01, 2002.

Because I scan all of my film, editing it in PS6, I almost always shoot in color, typically Provia w/ an M3 or M6. If I want color, the data is there; if I want B&W, I desaturate it. Great flexibility... The only exception to my personal rule is if I'm looking for grain or the absence of texture. For instance, I'll shoot Tri-X at 800 or Neopan 1600 (or at the other extreme, Acros/100). These films yield a look that's vastly different than a Fuji color stock. I'll usually shoot B&W from my IIIC using vintage lens. The look is pure 1940s- 50s, which my subject matter nicely... Most of my contemporary work is shot in color, & I love the saturation of Fuji stock.

An ideal film for Leicas is personal in choice. What effect are you looking for when you shoot images?

I use a flash w/ Leicas as little as possible. It's a technical hassle, & I'd rather think less & compose more. I recently have ordered a Metz 32Z for the TTL, but it's for a special shoot & will probably, unfortunately, end up in a box after I'm through.

But my personal use of film is just that--personal. And it's the result of much experimentation, finally arriving at a look that I'm happy with (& that I can predict when I raise my camera for a shot).

The bottom line, I suspect, is that Leicas are suberb instruments, & are flexible enough for many very different visions. Good luck!

-- Patrick Garner (pg@patrickgarner.com), February 01, 2002.

The best film for your Leica is the film you like the best. I don't mean this in a tongue and cheek way. I suggest you try different films and believe your eyes. Only you can say what is the best film.

-- David Enzel (dhenzel@vei.net), February 01, 2002.

I primarily use Reala and Provia 100F. I sometimes use Tri-X when shooting B/W, but I am tempted to try the new Acros 100. I think that the primary reason many people prefer B/W to colour is that it is more tolerant of low light sources with exposure latitude and that you don't need to worry about COLOUR TEMPERATURE- a big concern in low light at times, especially with fluro's etc.

When i shoot clour I handle light the same way I do with B/W because i concentrate on the subject and framing- worrying about light sources comes second. To correct colour temperature you need proper film and filteration which I never worry about.

I rarely use a flash unless their is a need or requirement from my subject. Usually if I can see the person in decent light, i won't use flash. I usually use a Nikon SB-23 with a SC-17 flash cord. Works well.

I don't believe in an ideal film for a Leica. Film works the same way in all cameras, and film choice shouuld be determined by the application and competence of the photographer- which leads me to my next point.....many photographers that use Leica are quite wealthy or have access to a lot of credit. So....they like to choose a film that they can get away with incorrect exposures- and Tri-X is the perfect film for that. Even Salgado admits this. Of course theie are also the other photographers that understand exposure and use Tri-X for its technical qualities. Sometimes I wonder which type of person I am. ........trying to improve my exposure understanding....though this can only be done with slide film as it is not forgiving.

-- kristian dowling (leicashot@hotmail.com), February 01, 2002.

The Leica was designed to be an all-round camera. But now there are so many other cameras that do many things much better and easier than the Leica, that its well-intentioned supporters have concocted a revisionist biography wherein the Leica was specifically meant for a) available light, b)no flash, c)black and white, d)candid street photography. Perhaps the Leica excels in those areas, but Barnack never intended the Leica's purpose to be limited. One only has to go through old Leitz catalogs to see that the Leica has been outfitted for every photographic purpose including microscopy, telephotography, stereophotography, copy work, underwater, opthalmic and endoscopic photography. And the Leica was one camera touted strongly as perfect for the newly-emerging realm of....color (Kodachrome) photography!

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), February 01, 2002.

IMHO, the absolute perfect film for use in a Leica is . . . (drum roll here, please) 35mm. ;-)

I agree that the choice between color and B&W should be based on the subject and the target use of the resulting images, and that the choice of specific films within either category is really a matter of personal choice for either the color rendition/saturation or grain and tonality characteristics of the film. When I shoot color, it's almost always transparencies, and either Fuji Provia 100F or Astia. My current favorites for B&W are Ilford Delta 100 for general use, HP5+ for low-light, or Delta 3200 for really low light.

I use flash (studio strobes) in the studio almost exclusively, and will use flash on location or at events where needed. I look at it this way - if fill is needed for the shot, and it won't spoil the mood, then it's OK - otherwise expose for what's important and frame, as much as possible, to eliminate what would otherwise be blown out.

-- Ralph Barker (rbarker@pacbell.net), February 01, 2002.

It's entirely a matter of personal choice. Personally, not being a professional shooter gives me the opportunity to shoot whatever suits my fancy; and I experiment as often as possible with different films. This Mardi Gras I'm shooting slide film, for the first time in many, many years. But, like Tony, Tri-X is my old standby. It's served me well over the years and I know it better than any other film. While I may ooh and aah over a good color shot, it's black and white that gives me the most satisfaction. And, yes, Leica seems to well suited for black and white IMO: shoot wide open, isolate your subject and dig that bokeh; or, set up an artsy architectural shot, stop down, and marvel at the sharp detail. On the other hand, these comments could apply equally to color, as some of the most stunning color shots I've seen have come from Leicas. Leicas are just extremely versatile. You can't help but being impressed by the quality of those lenses.

-- Dennis Couvillion (couvilaw@aol.com), February 01, 2002.

Hi Rob,

Ideal film for Leica? Easy. Kodachrome 25. It'll really make your expensive lenses shine. That would be my personal choice if I were shooting ideal subjects in ideal light. I would shoot Neopan 100 for black and white.

But my real world is another matter. And I can only cry, "Alas!" So my film of necessity is Fuji 800 Superia for color and 90% of my street work. When I shoot black and white I use Fuji Neopan 1600. I would prefer to use slide film, but the fast stuff is expensive and ugly. I would prefer to do most of my work in b & w but the project I started over two years ago requires color. I used to shoot Kodak 800 but prefer Fuji 800 because it isn't as grainy.

How do I handle photography around different light sources. Mostly I hope and pray, I guess. I expect film to turn weird tones in artificial light and anticipate and accept it. If you know what what's going to happen you can use the effects to create atmosphere. The fast color films of today -- or so it seems to me -- keep better balance in various lighting situations than the fast color films of old. Anway, I don't use different filters for different situations. I'm a street photographer; I have to work fast, and worrying about lighting situations too much slows me down.

I almost never use flash. I think flash is perfectly legit in Leica photography. I know a few street photographers who are very good at using hand held strobes. There are a few times when I wish I had had a flash with me. The truth is, however, that I don't feel comfortable with flash. A few weeks ago I got a good shot that would have been outstanding with a good use of flash. Maybe I'll carry around my Contax T-2 for special occations.

I agree that Leica R. F. photography is very personal. We are a different breed of cat.

-- Alex Shishin (shishin@pp.iij4-u.or.jp), February 01, 2002.

I think the choice in film really depends on how you are going to arrive at the final product, i.e. slides for projection, prints, or digital scans. I shoot with Fuji 800 Press almost exclusively because everything is scanned for publication. And that film gives you lots of latitude and makes great black and white images. As for the discussion on flash, it becomes a necessity in my business in many cases because that is about the only way you are going to get correct color. I use a product called Omni Bounce made by a company called Soften. I use my flash off camera a lot or if there is a nice low white ceiling I use bounce flash. Ceiling bounce flash gets you a natural look with color correction. Now back to film. The bests images I have ever taken were with a M-3 DS, 50/f2 on Kodachrome 25. You literally feel like you can walk into those images when they ar

-- Dayton P. Strickland (daytonst@bellsouth.net), February 02, 2002.

My "Everyday Life" project:

4020.net/everyday

... is shot mostly using Fuji P800. As you can see from the images, colour works just fine for available light indoors under mixed lighting conditions - you just have to know what you are doing. ie, know your way around photoshop's curve commands for colour correction ;?)

Personally I haven't used a flash since 1992.

-- Andrew Nemeth (azn@nemeng.com), February 02, 2002.

Andrew makes some good points, which echo a few others here. Personally I shoot color film a lot, about 40% of what I put through the camera. I like slide and negative material both for different things. I think slide film gets over-used sometimes for it's admitedly great color- but remember negatives have greater tonal range i.e. highlight AND shadow detail, not just one or the other.

As far as color temp goes, I like to expose properly and let weird light give me weird colors as it will. I also use fill flash sometimes, and let weird light fill in around it- I get hired to shoot a lot of my work because of the look of good skin tones (with fill) and a long shutter drag to bring in (often strange colored) available light. I also like to cross process and get negs from chrome or funky positives from neg film. You all should try these things sometimes- you'll get some nice results.

I will try to get some pics hosted somewhere soon so I can show you what I'm up to behind the camera...getting my site up by end of Feb...fingers crossed...

-- drew (swordfisher@hotmail.com), February 02, 2002.

I shoot B+W exclusively because: a) No corrections necessary. Yellow 12's on all lenses all the time. b) Higher fidelity- 1 emulsion layer vs. a few for color. Sharper. c) Wider dynamic range; d) I have complete control, thus only myself to blame.

There are plenty of reasons to shoot color, but personal gratification is my only goal, and B+W is my only way.

-- Mike DeVoue (karma77@att.net), February 02, 2002.

With the Leicas, I use b&w film more often, but I shoot a substantial amount of color film with them. For low-light work with slide film, I usually use EPJ 320T pushed a couple of stops. When there are variations from tungsten color temps, I try to use them to good effect and/or do corrections in PhotoShop (my 35mm color printing is done digitally). I recently tried out some NPZ and was impressed by the fine grain and its handling of mixed color temps--if negative film makes sense for a low-light situation, this will be the one I use.

I don't think in terms of an ideal film for a camera (though, in some cases, I think there are ideal films for a situation).

I've never used an on-camera flash with a Leica, but I have sometimes hooked it up to studio strobes or big portable units.

There's no reason other than personal preference to NOT use color film in a Leica. They do a great job with it.

Shot below was made with pushed EPJ and incandescent light. I was intentionally going for a "gold tone" look.

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), February 02, 2002.

I'm hardly using flash at all these days. My flash contacts only work on one camera and I can't be bothered to get the other one fixed. But I think I should use it more...

Colour/BW - well, if you want the authentic concerned snapperoo aura, wear a beat up M4 and shoot Tri-X. If you want to take pictures of things, use whatever looks nice. Personally I have colour vision and like to see pictures that look like the world, so I shoot colour.

I find the scanner software these days does a mighty job of correcting colour automatically and I can seldom improve on it myself.

Here's a picture that was taken in red light, in a room with yellow walls, with red subjects. An uncorrected scan was completely red. Vuescan uses the white point to determine what makes sense and did a pretty good job of it. BTW, it's a beauty parlour in Dharavi, Bombay.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), February 02, 2002.

tmax3200 (usually@1600) for low light/mixed light indoors, night city outdoors; Kodak CN400 for quick 'n dirty snapshots (very forgiving, even with occasional direct flash); Velvia or Provia 100 for hikes/landscapes; Portra 160NC or 400NC for outdoors, studio flash or window lit portraits; Fuji Superia 800 when colour is complusory in adverse mixed light situations

All outsourced processing. Portra, Superia and CN400 negs can be processed within the hour at the corner shop.

Occasional in house fun with tri-X, especially on Sundays or holidays, when the processing labs are closed.

Low light with colour stock is often a disappointing exercise, unless you boldly go for certain colour casts (like our great Mike Dixon). This is not specific to Leica of course. True, as pointed by Rob, scanner + Photoshop do wonders in tweaking those casts.

But I will still usually leave the colour behind when the light gets complicated.

-- Jacques (jacquesbalthazar@hotmail.com), February 02, 2002.

If you haven't tried color negative for available light color you are missing out on a useful tool. For me, 400 is the ideal film: good grain and sharpness. I find the Kodak material more forgiving in unusual situations like mixed light. Overexpose by half a stop for richer images. Then, using Photoshop, conform the image to the vision you saw....

-- R. M. Lightfoot (rmlcd@avenew.com), February 07, 2002.

I use both equally, color: Reala, Provia 100F, NPHII 800 - B/W: Ilford XP2 rated at 200 ASA, Ilford HP5+ Delta 100. For me its the buttery tonal range I get with the films I like. As a Portrait photography, these films seem to suit me fine. Lighting is everyhting: in natural light I always meter spot - using a zone system in my head (A.A. 5 zones for chrome + color neg, 7 for B/W). I expose for the results I want and try to eliminate the rest. Sometime the scene is too contrasty or too much exposure latitute. Then I'll get out the ND grads or make some tough decisions. I don't think there is an ideal film for Leica, it's what works for you. The Leica bodies and optics give me the look I want out of 35mm. I don't need the fancy gadgets or fast AF of some of the newer cameras. I use flash primarily for fill - 1 1/2-2 stops under ambient light - very often my background might be a stop over or a stop under, depending on what I want. I like to play with the mix of ambient light and strobe. I'm using strobes in the studio and I'm always trying to look at new ways to soften my light and produce that beautiful edge from hightlight to shadow. (I guess I'm not into contrasty lighting - yet) I've used many systems(Pentax, Nikon, Minolta, and Hasselblad), and Leica (and 35mm)suits me the best.

-- Brooke Anderson (dbanders@videotron.ca), February 07, 2002.