Back when I shot and printed film, my results: For controlled conditions, FP4, for low light Delta 3200, and Tri-X for everything else, developed in XTOL using specifications from The Film Developer Cookbook. Most of the time it was 11 minutes at 3:1 at room temperature with full agitation for a minute, one inversion every 30 seconds thereafter. To expose Tri-X correctly, use an incident meter with ISO set to 400 and read a shadow. (If you don't have an incident meter, use the camera's meter set to spot mode and read a standard grey card) In bright sunlight or other harsh lighting, set the camera to the shadow reading minus 1/2 stop. So, if the meter indicates f/8 at 1/250, set the camera to f/9.6 at 1/250. In bright soft light, (partly cloudy with soft shadows), read a shadow and set the camera to the meter's recommended setting. In shade, take a reading and add 1/2 stop exposure. I always defaulted to Tri-X for its marvelous tonality. For FP4, set the meter to ISO 85 and take a normal incident reading in the key light. For Delta 3200, shoot at 1000. This will produce near perfect exposure for an optical print. I was shooting medium format, so I can't speak to 35mm. BTW, the reason to shoot FP4 and other general-purpose films at 2/3 stop hotter than box speed is that the ISO rating assumes that your T/Stop (actual light transmission) is the same as F/Stop (theoretical speed). It is not. In real life, an actual lens loses about 1/2 stop of light compared to the theoretical ideal. When shooting any kind of negative film, small differences should be resolved in the favor of more exposure, hence the 2/3 stop figure.

The TRI-X and the HP5 are closely neck and neck. The JCH was too dark in most photos and only a few photos looked great for the JCH. I would recommend both the Kodak and the Ilford. I do use Kodak for color photography and Ilford for black and white photography. Keep up the good work young lady because we need more people like you to start shooting film so we can influence camera companies to start making new film cameras. Peace, Flood!

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

I agree, the JCH was already a contrasty film so I felt it didn't quite perform as well as the other two under most situations... although I did enjoy some of the shots off of that roll! I shoot mostly Ilford as well for my b&w work, so I will probably end up sticking with it! Thanks for watching, I'm glad you enjoyed it! There's lots more content on the way!

@evelasq1

6 жыл бұрын

You are very welcome. If you wish to see my Ilford HP5 Photo of the Manhattan skyline in New York City than go to flic.kr/p/25DDPoE. I was using a Nikon F5 with a Nikon 50mm F1.4 AIS Lens. Peace, Flood!

@henricvs

5 жыл бұрын

Jess Hobbs JCH is near ir sensitive. It really is very different from the two other films.

You missed a wall with crumbling plaster and shadows at 8.44 but how wonderfully sharp your K1000 shots are well done.

Really love the systematic approach to these comparisons, which is often lacking in videos like these. Don't worry about people that complain about the developer used. By changing only one criteria at a time, we can measure the differences. Now you can also create videos that conpare the same film against different developers to get us more authoritative information for those as well! Keep up the good work.

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

That's a great idea about using different developers, that could definitely be a whole episode on its own! I love doing these comparison videos, I do have plans for more in the future! Thanks for watching!

@FilmPhotographyChannel

5 жыл бұрын

I agree 100%. If you're going to have an accurate comparison, the scanning should be done by a lab for consistency.

@ldbass62

3 жыл бұрын

Love this video! The comparisons were very helpful.

I think Tri-X looks best, but carrying all 3 cameras must have been a massive pain in the arse.

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

It was a tad uncomfortable, to say the least! But I did have a lot of fun shooting this video, and all of the positive response I have been getting makes it totally worth the neck pain! I was actually surprised at how little difference I found between Tri-X and HP5, they are both such beautiful films. And I think the JCH really has its moments as well, so it's going to be fun to experiment some more! Thanks for watching!

@richardmayberry5905

3 жыл бұрын

I would tend to suggest that the pain might be a bit higher - a pain in the neck? 📸

Always used HP5 and Tmax 400 love em both recently tried triX love it never tried street pan but I’m gonna I love the look of it. Top work mate 📷❤️

A thousand subscribers off one video is unheard of in analogue photography, but your passion and enthusiasm really comes through. You also seem to have a good grounding in the analogue process which isn’t always the case on KZread, but those journeys are wonderful to watch too. Between Tri-x and HP5+ it’s purely subjective, personally I prefer the crispness of HP5+ and it’s been my go to film for many years but I do also shoot Tri-X from time to time especially if I’m shooting indoors. I was very disappointed in the Streetpan 400 though, it was extremely muddy in places, but I would give it a try with a sharper developer. I always use Rodinal 1:50 as my usual developer for 400 films. Another excellent video, strangely I had a look yesterday to see if Id missed any. Hope your leg is fully recovered.

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

I am pretty overwhelmed by the positive response I have been receiving, it has all been pretty amazing! HP5+ has been my go-to film for years, so I was pretty excited to put it up against Tri-X and JCH. I felt that the JCH was too contrasty for most situations, although I did enjoy a few shots off of that roll. I am looking forward to doing more experimentation with all if these films! Thanks for watching!

@davidlorenzo285

6 жыл бұрын

If you over expose the jch a bit it looks better. you can also shoot it for great results on cloudy or bad weather days.

@markharris5771

6 жыл бұрын

David Lorenzo David Lorenzo I might do some experimenting myself, what developer do you use please?

This is another enjoyable presentation. Keep it up. Thank you. RS. Canada

great video, you can clearly see how streetpan struggles with high dinamic range photos but when theres not so much dinamic range on the scene deliveres a more pleasing contrast phot compared to HP5 and Tri-X. keep up the work

The Tri-x and HP5 which is also a favorite of mine look very similar. The JCH Streetpan is definitely more contrasty.

that is a great review of all these diffrent films! thanks for sharing this with us! really enjoyed watching this!

Great job! I love that you are using the same setup in each camera. You really get a feeling for how each film reacts to the scene. Great channel!

I subscribed to your channel today based on this video! You have done one of the best back-to-back comparisons of different film stocks that I have seen. Same camera, same lens, same subject, same day/time. Really helpful for us viewers. Keep up the great work!

Thank you for the comparison video! I just ordered a roll of JCH with my latest film order so I’m looking forward to trying it out. Now I use D-76 so I don’t expect to get the exact same results contrast wise as you did but at least I have a baseline. I’m expecting a bit more contrast with D-76 which I use 1:1. Your results with Tri-X vs HP5 are exactly my experiences as well. HP5 has lower contrast and better shadow detail but in your images where the lighting is flatter, the contrast differences become almost nil. Anyway, great video. I just found your channel today and subbed. This is the second one I watched with the Delta 3200 vs TMAX 3200 being my first. Wonderful job in production!

Always interesting to watch these comparisons.

Very enjoyable video. Please continue. Thanks. RS. Canada

Excellent video. The main difference among the three film, is the higher contrast of JCH. I can’t see a real difference between Tri-X and HP5+. Don’t worry about the developer, every photographer has a favorite one. Please, keep producing videos like this.

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

I noticed that the JCH was the most different of the three, I have to admit I was quite surprised by the results! As for developers, for the moment I am at the mercy of my local lab, but X-Tol was always a good one for me, although I do enjoy using HC-110 as well. My next video will definitely be different, but I love doing these comparison videos too... there's lots more to come! Thanks for watching!

@RobertoGonzalez-qw4ll

6 жыл бұрын

Jess Hobbs thanks for your reply. I like to develop my films and I have a preference for certain developers. D-76 and ID-11 are my favorites presently. Film photography is fascinating and one of the things I love more is the active involvement in the processing of the negatives. Thanks once again for your reply.

Excellent video! Please keep them coming, thanks

Montreal is such a photogenic city...even the parking lots look good! Nice video and keep up the good work

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

Montreal really is a beautiful city, it's so nice to photograph here! Thanks for watching, I'm glad you enjoyed it!

Excellent side by side by side comparison video. I love your style and approach here. Thanks

The K1000 is a wonderful camera in terms of reliability and usability. I still own a number of vintage 70's film cameras, including NIkon, Pentax, and Olympus models. The 35mm SLR that I pick up the most now is a Pentax K1000. It is absolutely reliable, and those old Pentax Lenses were awesome! In terms of the film you used, I built my first darkroom as a teen in the 70's and always shot with Plus-X and Tri-X which I developed in D-76. I should by rights prefer the Tri-X, but I found myself equally impressed by the HP5. The StreetPan seemed a little too dark, almost underexposed in many of the comparison shots. Nice job - I enjoyed the video.

Nothing different to add from the previous comments, I just want to say thank you. Both your videos are great, keep going :)

Thank you, I have enjoyed your video and learned a lot, I use three film cameras a 1952 Leica 3F 35mm, Mamiya C330s TLR 120 and a Mamiya RB67 pro SD 120, black and white has never been my thing, however, recently I have started to appreciate black and white images and decided to give it a serious try. Here in the UK we produce Ilford and I will be shooting a few rolls of HP5 plus whilst roaming around my village of River near Dover, once again thank you and a happy new year. please keep up the good work.

Thanks for another excellent video! Looking forward to four cameras...

Hi Jess highly informative video . Out of all the three films HP5 plus is the one for me. I am obviously biased because this is my natural go to film that i can rely on in any given situation. You have got the knack Jess with your presentation so keep up the good work and i look forward to your next video. Beautiful location too. Klive

Nice job on this comparison. No defense due for using XTOL; it's a great general developer. The shadows on Streetpan are muddy and lack detail because its true speed appears to be somewhere around 100; it appears to be higher contrast because it's being overdeveloped, probably to compensate for its lack of speed. Preference between Tri-X and HP-5 will probably be sorted by brand loyalty rather than technical differences; my personal preference has been HP-5 for about 30 years. This is my first contact with your channel, and I like what I see, so subscribing.

Another good video, nice job; I enjoy watching your vids..

Same cameras, same lenses, different films. There isn't a lot of comparisons out here that have variable controlled like you do. Great job!

These comparison videos are interesting. Do not worry about the developer. I think these videos give a good representation of the films under a variety of conditions. Thanks!

Really enjoyed this video too. And great to see one of my favorite cities. In order of preference: Ilford, Kodak, JCH.

cool! the best way to compare 2 or more films instead of just talking about it.

Well done Jess!

Another great video. I liked Ilford better in this speed. I bet you get some looks walking around with stacked cameras.

I like the side by side comparisons it gives the opportunity to actually compare them on the screen. Looks like hp5 and tri-x are pretty close. Have you considered using a external light meter to take out the variables of the three in camera meters? Thanks for your work.

Great comparison, really cool way to do it. I personally think the film choice matter less than people think, and the best way to control the look of the photo is in the exposure, development and scanning/printing. HP5 has the ability to be quite flat, or very contrasty depending on how you use it.

Thaaanks a lot!!! Great video.

Great job!

Great video! I'm using mostly HP5+ at the moment as I have a roll of 30m. I used quiet a lot of Tri-X before but it's just getting more expensive. When I want to push a roll (1600 ISO or above), I still use Tri-X as I like the results a bit better than with the Ilford. Pretty disappointed with the Streetpan, but as it seems it was quiet a bright day, maybe it could explain the high contrast. Might give it a try for graphic pictures and/or in a duller day. Anyway, thanks for your video and keep up posting interesting vids like this!

thanks Jess interesting video and keep on shooting. Been to Montreal a couple times a great city.

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

I do love living here, it really is a beautiful city! Thanks for the kind words, and thanks for watching!

Excellent and informative video. Good to see this standard from someone so young.

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

Lol, I'm not quite as young as I look, but I appreciate the kind words! I've been shooting film for many years, and it's been fun to take that passion and share it with others. Thanks for watching, I'm glad you enjoyed it!

@jonjanson8021

6 жыл бұрын

Lol, well you look a lot younger than me. (You wouldn't want to look like me). My first good camera was a brand new Pentax Spotmatic.

JCH looks like it needs to be shot at 200 asa or even 100 asa to calm that contrast, a diluted developer should work best, good video.

Loved this! Really pleased to see the support you have been receiving. I was very excited to see the JCH, however I was very disappointed in how muddy it looks. Almost appears sepia as well. My personal favourite is Delta 400. Let me know if you ever want to go shooting! I also live in Montreal.

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

I was a little disappointed with the JCH as well, but now I have more of an idea of its ideal conditions. I have always loved Delta 400 too, I switched to HP5 because it's a great film and it's cheaper! We should definitely go out and shoot sometime! Thanks for watching!

Great video!

Love it!

Very interesting thanks for sharing!

@JessHobbs

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much, and thanks for watching!

Really enjoyed this video Jess! I've shot both HP5+ and Tri-X but not the JCH which seems quite contrasty at least at box speed. I lean towards Tri-X for my work for it's sharpness and certain glow in highlights. But HP5+ is also lovely for portraits. Looking forward to your next video :)

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

I had never shot JCH before either, and I was actually quite surprised at the amount of contrast. My go-to film has always been HP5, both at box speed and pushing it, but I did enjoy the Tri-X as well. Thanks for watching, I'm glad you enjoyed it!

Hi Jess I know I am late to the party but I do love JCH and HP5 I have shot HP5 for over 35 years it’s was our go to film when I was an Army Photographer back in the 80s it’s so flexible push or pull it forgiving if your exposure was off I would always recommend it to any newbie to film photography if you get a chance try and shoot JCH at 260 iso results are good 👍🏻 I do like it for it’s contrast keep up your good work 👍🏻

Well done Jess... your side by side comparison is awesome. JCP certainly has the most contrast of the 3 but it loses detail in shadows quickly. HP5+ was my overall fav, good contrast and excellent highlight detail

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

HP5 has been my go-to film for years, so I'm definitely biased! I was surprised that there weren't as many differences between HP5 and Tri-X as I had thought, but I was really surprised by the JCH, I wasn't expecting for it to be so contrasty... I think it's a really nice film under certain circumstances. Thanks for watching!

You can definitely see that JCH is more contrasty. For some shots that was actually fine. Personally, I think that overall the Tri-X looks best. So, for general purpose shooting that might be the choice. I am a big believer in standardizing on a developer and getting to know its characteristics. So, I agree with your choice to use xtol consistently throughout the process.

I have to say that with JCH Streetpan, it looks like you exposed for the highlights hence what seems to be a lot of contrast in the result. Tri-X and HP5+ obviously hold the middle ground. Although like you mentioned early on in the video, the results could differ depending on what developer is used and at what dilution/time etc. Overall this was an excellent video.

I've shot a bunch of hp5 and Tri-x over the years both lovely films. I haven't tried JCH yet but if I ever come across it on a sale I might pick a roll or two up.

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

I really liked the results I got from all three films, I think each one is really beautiful under the proper circumstances. JCH isn't the cheapest option, but I think it'll have a nice spot in my film fridge to shoot once in a while! Thanks for watching!

Love your style! I love the JCH but i think the Tri X and HP5 are great mediums unless you want something with flare like the JCH!

Hey Jess, another excellent video! I would love to see how HP5 compares in 3 different developers! Maybe someone has already done that?

Xtol is a superb developer for all T-grain films (tmax, delta and acros)

uh regarding your delta vs Tmax video Xtol is a perfectly good developer for T grain films, you did fine in choosing Xtol.

I like the jch best. I love the neutrals and the backs.

Great job .... love your vids .... Love TriX and HP5 .... if I shot JCH, I would shot it at 200 ... it looked a touch underexposed... can’t wait for your next vid!

@lilblingking1491

6 жыл бұрын

JCH is a SUPER contrasty film. You have to be careful of the situations in which you use it. I usually rate it at 320 and develop it in Ilfotec HC . It's an excellent film and yields beautiful results given it's exposed properly

I can barely tell the different between HP5 and Tri-X. Cool video.

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

I noticed that too! I really expected to see more differences between the films, so I was quite surprised with the results. Thanks for watching!

@beepboopimarobot2841

6 жыл бұрын

yeah, exactly. I was also expecting Tri-X to be way more contrasty. At least that's the case in many other comparison videos on youtube and it seems to be "broad agreement" in the film community as well. That's funny. Thanks for that!

FIRST! Another great video of course... perhaps you could take a little tour up Mont Royal? I'll bet you get some interesting shots at Tam-Tams...

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

Yeah, I definitely want to film in other parts of the city, it's such a photogenic city! Congrats on being first, and thanks for watching!

wow, now that is exuding confidence!!- not just putting on two cameras, but THREE?, will you be touting FOUR next time?

Great video! HP5 is my pick as it is so flat and so easy to scan compare to Tri-X. I have yet not try JCH so can't comment on that but HP5 capture shadow details quite well and adding contrast is much easier than reducing one in post.

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

I'm a big fan of HP5 for the same reasons, although I will admit I liked the Tri-X more than I thought I would. The JCH turned out to be quite contrasty, but I think it's really nice under certain conditions. Thanks for watching, I'm happy you enjoyed it!

another great video! I really appreciate the effort of always getting two or now even three identical cameras and lenses (never seen this done by anyone else wow!) this is really fantastic for comparison's sake. I agree that the developer should be the same to keep the variations only on the film type. really nothing to complain on your testing methodology only good things to say from me on that! now on to films: Tri-X-->Winner :) midtones contrast and tonal rendition is just superb and sharpness as well. HP-5 is great and looks a little faster (a tiny bit more shadow detail) but it is flatter and a little less sharp. With another developer sharpness could improve on HP-5 and get worse on Tri-x (this is the beauty of film photography!).. Personally I think HP-5 would be great in medium format for portraits when less grain and lower skintones contrast is desired... And FP-4+ is too slow to use :). As for Streetpan... well I think it can be used at box speed for dull days, however, given the evident lack of shadow detail (and highlights sometimes so latitude must not be comparable to the other two), exposing at 200 (or 160) and developing at 200 in brigth days and 400 in dull days would give better results. Very fine grain though and midtones look good. Keep up the good work!

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

Honestly, you read my mind! I agree 100% with your analysis, and I think it will be fun to experiment with different developers over time. I think each film performs well under the right circumstances, it's great to have so many 400 speed films to choose from (and let's not forget about Delta 400, another beautiful film!). I actually shoot a lot of FP4 in medium format, but less so in 35mm. Thanks for watching, I'm happy you enjoyed it!

Me gustó mucho tu análisis, se agradece, me imagino un poco de dolor de cuello

You are so correct about the Pentax K-1000. They never let you down. My photography class in high school used Pentax cameras for that very reason. They are a very basic camera that rarely fails. As for the films, I've never used either the Ilford or the JCH films but from looking at your results, I am most certainly going to give them a try along with the Kodak P3200 from your first video. Did you use the same lab to develop the films for this video and if so, did you have them used the same developer as you did in your first video?

@JessHobbs

3 жыл бұрын

I'm a big fan of all-mechanical cameras, less electronics (usually) means less problems. And the K-1000's were built like tanks, but beautiful at the same time, so I really enjoy using them. I did have all three rolls processed at the same lab as the P3200 video, and they were all processed in Xtol 1+1. Since these videos came out, I actually do my own b&w processing at home, but I tend to stick with Xtol because I really love that developer. Just as the K-1000's are dependable, so is Xtol, I've yet to be disappointed by it. I have to give JCH another try, I actually haven't shot it since this video, but Ilford is pretty much my go-to for b&w. I am also really enjoying the P3200 revival, all great films. Thanks for watching!

This is interesting hp5 and tri-x look almost exactly the same hp5 has a little bit more shadow detail but that seems to be it

There's a good number of situations where the JCH does really well. Very contrasty. I think it only struggles with shadow detail sometimes.

Excellent video, but that necklace seems to me a bit heavy. Great work

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

Hahaha, yeah, those cameras were pretty heavy! It was a fun video to shoot though, so totally worth it! Thanks for watching!

now you know how many film you can test at the same time, 3 max. I found that the JCH loose some details in the in the shadows although it does give a more 1950's look to the photo. Not sure I would use it for every situation but I can see using it for a more vintage finish. My favorite from your video was the HP5. I have a roll of Tri-X 400 right now in my camera,first time using it and have already have shot two rolls of the HP5. Will have my own comparison pretty soon

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

Yeah, I don't think my neck could handle more cameras! I agree with your analysis, I had come to pretty much the same conclusions myself! I think each film will be fun to play around with more, although I totally have a soft spot for HP5! Thanks for watching!

Hej, Jess. You have done a very important job. You have made it excellent. Is it possible to see a couple of detail-blow ups? At first look. I agree with all of the other people here. But sometimes the difference would be a little clearer in a blow up. Is blow up right ? We call it "Auszug-Vergrößerung" in german.

I love this video. I started shooting the JCH 400 a couple of months ago and am still on the fence between continuing to use this or the Delta 400. JCH is very contrasty and I love the results when I manage to give it sufficient light. If it doesn't get sufficient light I feel it becomes quite murky quickly. Maybe it should be rated at ISO 200 🤷🏻‍♂

@JessHobbs

5 ай бұрын

I have heard from other people that they often shoot it at ISO 200, so it's definitely worth giving it a try! Thanks for watching!

i love all three, but ilford is cheaper, so ilford for me

Thank you !

Tri-x probably has the edge but for cost factors I mainly shoot hp5. great video.

@benjaminvleugels5609

3 жыл бұрын

Same here but in my opinion between tri-x and ilford it's a tie ilford is like half the price so ilford it is

The JCH seemed too dark for my taste, and the others were so similar that I will just stick with what I'm most familiar with, which is Tri-X.

how many of those pentax do you have? lol I'm struggling to get one.

I shoot mainly TriX with Tmax Developer. I'm always using a yellow filter and my scans end up looking similar to the contrast of the JCH, especially for street stuff this look works really well. This was a nice comparison and it would be nice to see some more of these with various films, maybe some Tmax 100 vs. Delta 100 vs. Kentmere 100... Just an idea. Some feedback on the video itself. A lot of the scenes of you talking seem like you are talking to a camera rather than the viewers; it comes off feeling a bit unnatural or uncomfortable. Try thinking about it as if you were speaking to another person and no so much making a youtube video. Aside from that you are doing great, can't wait for the next vid.

The JCH looks too dark in some of the photos and is not for me. But the Kodak and Ilford are highly competitive. I would think that these two films would be the best choice. Ms. Hobbs, Have you tried the Cinestill ISO 250 Black and White film? I have used it for a photography studio class and it came out great.

Great work, from the photos, HP5 and TriX are neck and neck, JCH too much contrast and less shadow detail. Easy decision to keep using HP5 as it's half the price of the JCH in the UK!

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

Wow, that's a huge price difference! JCH isn't twice the price in Canada, but it's still significantly higher. I have always been an Ilford shooter myself, and it performed well under all circumstances, which is what I look for in a film. Thanks for watching!

Hi! Can you please tell what type/brand of shoes are you wearing in this sesh/walk?? Thanx... oh, btw, liked & subscribed... Ciao

Looks like each film has its own strength in its own comfortable environment.... I think i like the consistency of HP5.... Like you once said... You can add...... but its harder to take away!! :-)

The JSH Streetpan I found to rappidly lose important shadow detail at the cost of being "contrasty". The price is way too high for a budget quality filmstock.

Great video Jess! It looks to me that HP5 and Tri-X are interchangeable. They look the same in all the comparison shots. The JCH Streetpan has an obviously heavier contrast that doesn't always work for me. There are some shots with the JCH that I preferred over the other two, but only a few. I just don't like crushed shadows i guess. Stop by my channel too if you like. Thanks.

good comparison, the ilford HP-5 + was best, not two light, and not as contrasty as the JCH streetpan, which made some of the warf shots look a bit dark, maybe washed out some shadows; the tri-X was a bit light, over exposing the highlights, so HP-5+ is defenately a safer film, goes for the middle ground, not overexposing, or under exposing the high and low tones of a scene, but the others are good, to deal with low or bright conditions, and the JCH is a good contrasty film, for that look.

Nice comparison. JCH looks a bit underexposed and overdeveloped in some scenes with high contrast. And no need to use special developer for each type of film. If you are wondering which developer to use, go for FX-39II or even the Wehner developer (classic Atomal remake), if you can get it. The last one is sold exclusively from Klaus Wehner. But there is nothing wrong with ID-11, D-76 or xtol. I personally liked D-76 pretty much.

Xtol as a developer and scanned with a Noritsu is a really good benchmark for a basic comparison. Most labs will use Xtol and the Noritsu. And the Noritsu is fairly good with BW films. Also Xtol isn't a terrible developer for the 3200 films.

@JessHobbs

2 жыл бұрын

I love Xtol, it's fantastic developer that can handle a variety of situations and films! It might not always be the best choice, but like you said, it's what most labs use. And now that I do my own development at home again (at the time my local darkroom had shut down, and I wasn't set up at home yet), I use Xtol regularly. When I filmed this video a few years ago, I had gotten a lot of negative comments about using Xtol for the 3200 films, so I think I was feeling too defensive and insecure, lol! Thanks for the reassurance, I really appreciate it! And thanks for watching!

nice shot ! 8:13

HP5 has the best overall look for me.

Jess Hobbs As we have no direct way to see the negatives to give a totally objective comparison, I can only go by what's on the screen: I really dislike the soot-and-whitewash look of the JCH with blocked highlights and blank shadows, indicating a very low dynamic range. It would be interesting for you to plot the film's H&D curves for a better comparison, but I would not want to spend money on bricks of JCH and then experiment with various developers, even though I have a sneaky suspicion that something like a catechol-caustic might be able to tame it, but with EI dropped significantly.

JCH only looks good in low dynamic-range situations. In high dynamic range, the midtones are very muddy.

Never tried JCH street pan.. I would use rodinal developer on Trix and HP5

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

I can't wait to experiment more with these films and different developers! Personally, I don't have a lot of experience with Rodinal, but I do like HC-110 a lot... and there are so many more to choose from! Thanks for watching!

The main difference between Tri-X and HP5+ ? Almost 1€ per roll where I live ... Ilford is the best value for money these days.

HP5 and Tri-X are definitely close enough to be interchangeable. Seems like you can notice some slight differences if you're really going over each photo, whereas the JCH stuff is completely different. Definitely wasn't a fan of the Streetpan but I could see it potentially doing well in certain situations.

@JessHobbs

6 жыл бұрын

I agree 100%, I think the JCH has a lot of potential under the right circumstances, although the other two are more well-rounded films. I was surprised at how little difference there was between HP5 and Tri-X as well. Thanks for watching!

Well you proved what was always the case. Trix and HP5 are close with a tiny bit more detail in the shadows for the HP5. Now for the streetpan film it gets interesting. Because your pictures shows that the streets isn't actually a 400 speed film. With the amount of shadow loss I would guess that it is more like a 160 or 200.

I thought your concept was good, and a few shots could could have been some nice composition, like the corner of the building you had at one point, but that shot was a bit off tilt. Just some thoughts keep at it.

The JCH looks like it would be much happier at EI 200. The results at box speed look underexposed. I also suppose that someone could say that using three different bodies could introduce variables, since all shutter speeds might not be exactly accurate, but then I guess the best way to be fully scientific about the comparison would be to use a 4x5 or interchangeable back medium format...

You look like Dennis Hopper in ‘Apocalypse Now’ with all those cameras around your neck

@JessHobbs

3 жыл бұрын

Hahaha, from the notification all I could see was "you look like Dennis Hopper...", so I'm glad that ended the way it did!! 🤣 Thanks for the laugh!

@bladerunner8832

3 жыл бұрын

@@JessHobbs Thanks for not giving me the other finger. Appreciated

@JessHobbs

3 жыл бұрын

@@bladerunner8832 hahahaha, no way, that comment made me laugh out loud! If you can't laugh at yourself, then you're taking life too seriously!

@bladerunner8832

3 жыл бұрын

@@JessHobbs Amen sister!

Tri-X and HP5 are too close to call a winner for me. I use both and like both. Never used the JCH. Based on your video I probably won’t.

@JessHobbs

4 жыл бұрын

Personally, HP5 is my favourite... I find it better suited to my work, and it's such a versatile film. I like Tri-X as well, but I just don't connect with it the way I do HP5. I think the JCH can definitely have it's advantages in certain situations, just less versatile than the other two films. It was fun to compare them side-by-side, and helped give even myself a better understanding about what makes each film! Thanks for watching!

Tri-X is the King.

Be careful of those cyclists in Old Montreal. They'll run you down sooner than a car will. Try shooting HP-5 and Tri-X between 300 and 200 (depending on your light meter and shutters) and then adjust development time accordingly for the highlights, depending on results. Tends to give better results. I don't know about that Streetpan film. I guess I won't bother trying it.

@fretlessfender

6 жыл бұрын

Igaluit you are absolutely right. In this case Xtol did that job. It tends to higher the sensitivity for shadows approx 1stop... And it did!

@Igaluit

6 жыл бұрын

Really? I've never used Xtol. I mixed a batch once and never used it. The volumes to be mixed were insanely high - 2 gallons (to prevent it fom failing). Now, I like the acutance it seems to give, but I was too spooked the developer would fail suddenly when I had something good to develop. But, even with any film, even that Streetpan film, you can probably make it do what you want by playing with exposure and development time. I guess that with Streetpan, you would have to expose at a higher ISO than box speed.

Is it just me or Tri-X here looks like HP5 and vice versa?