Really enjoyed this. And your attitude of “it’s my party so stuff it” was soooo refreshing! Beautiful children, and congrats to whomever is about to have a baby join their family. 😊
Really liked that you left the "Thank you" right after taking this gentleman's image (around 1:40). It might be a small thing but I think it's an important gesture.
Hey guys! Nice to see you‘re checking out film. And nice to see an analogue Nikon FE at work. At the beginning of the year I bought a FE2 in a very good state and started again shooting film. And what can I say, it’s so much fun!!! The pics you’ve shot look pretty good and I would like to check out this new Acros II. But here in Europe it’s not so easy to get it. But anyway, thanks for your video! I would definitely appreciate to see more film related stuff from you😉✌️👋!
I've always thought the digital film simulation felt off, but it's interesting to see how much closer it is to the actual film when pushed to 400. Great video as usual, fellas!
Always love the content you guys put out. Interesting and fun, plus you make it seem so effortless - like you just happened to be developing some Acros film when we stopped by for a coffee and a catch up. Amazingly high standards - in all circumstances. Somewhat akin to Fuji in fact, brilliantly carving out a niche and relevance in the new market-place.
Loved this! I know you're a digital channel but this was a lovely change of pace. Thanks! PS you fix the hell out of it Chris and don't let anyone change ya ;)
Enjoyable video as usual. Acros didn't exist when I last shot film, but I do like the Fuji look. At home I used to prefer the Pattersons as they were easier to use. But out on the road as a photo journalist we used the steel tanks as they were very strong. As to washing for and hour..LOL We never had the time, films just of a cursory rinse before being dried with a hairdryer. I still have negs that 30 years after this treatment can still be printed.
Thank you for the review, the film looks amazing in my opinion. many things considering photography look amazing to me lately I don't know what's going on I have all around positive vibe somehow:D one of the rare things that stand out in a negative way to me still are harsh highlight. And I understand that the test had to be made with default settings but I wonder what would happen if you turn the contrast all the way down on the xt3?
Lovely to get in contact with the old film days again. I remember learning photography from my dad, he forced me to learn correct exposure because he didn't want to pay for bad pictures. Then I started to take two pictures of each subject (Just in case) and then he got angry again 😅 telling me that it was to expensive to pay for the same image twice! So I learned to get my shit together and trust myself 😁
I learnt on digital and my dad was pretty much the same expect instead of costing too much it cost him too much space on his laptop. Plus I had a 400D with a 128mb card so I got like 40 pics anyway so I guess I got the film experience
This is a journey down memory lane for me - I had an FE and this motor drive too. I should never have bought the F3 which let me down … I've already bought a roll of 120 Acros II, let's see! Interesting way of moving the tank (here in Europe, it's more Jobo tanks, because the Paterson tanks are not as tight, therefor inversion does not work that well; yes, easier to load, but this is more true for 120 film, not so much for 35 mm).
OMG a trip down memory lane. I used to make a room into a darkroom, trays, chems, and B and W Tri Ex or Acros....in my college apartments. what fun!!!!! but THANK GOODNESS no more chemicals, only 32 photos per roll, always running to buy film, then if you did color? crap, to the local photo store. and more money. GOD BLESS DIGITAL REVOLUTION.
Honestly developing Acros in Rodinal is just brutal in my opinion. Rodinal is a great ad hoc developer, but produces a lot of really intensive grain whereas Acros was made to deliver fine tones and only very little grain. Try XTOL 1:1 next time and you'll get even better results. It's also a lot more environment friendly.
I've been really struggling. I shot film for 40 years and sold all my Nikon gear in 2006. I have been hankering about going back to film , but when I costed it all out, including investing in a good camera and a couple of lenses, scanner and the cost of film here in Australia at $25-30 a roll, I ran the white flag up and will be investing in a Fuji X-T100 and the 23mm f2. The Acros film simulation is enough for me.
Sorry that’s been so hard for you man. Have you tried buying in bulk rolls then DSLR scanning with your camera? Could be a viable option to scratch that film itch!
i don't understand why anyone would leave critical comments on a video like this? Chris is doing a great job, and this is a Jordan+Chris video, they can develop film any way they like isn't it? maybe Chris is just finish for people like me to leave comments?
Hey, Mate. Great video! Could you help me? Where do i find the lens mount scan that you used in one of the scenes ? Is it an adaptation ? Maybe a video about it would be nice! Tks!
Hello Chris, thank’s a lot for the great video about the Acros. Also thank’s a lot for the RAW-files from the scans on the gallery. Would it be possible to give us the XT-3 RAW files also? It would be a pleasure for me to play with them with the Fujifilm X RAW Studio. Best regards and take care, Alex
If you think '70's zooms suck," then you've never been near a Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm Macro Zoom. Particularly the ones whose serial number starts with "28." That's a Komine-built version, and is a legendary lens. I have one for both my K1000, and my 3 Nikons (F3, FE, and EM) and they are fabulous lenses. In fact, that might be a good video subject- get the Series 1 built be the 3 big dogs - Kiron, Tokina, and Komine - and do a comparison. (Serials start with "22," "37," and "28," respectively.) Probably change your opinion of how much "70's zooms suck." ..Joe
Thanks Joe! I did have the series 1 zoom. It was a 3.5 max aperture regardless and had amazing macro capability. I miss that one a lot. Some of the Kiron stuff was ok too. But for the most part they just didn't deliver good enough results for my liking. I do have a Tokina ATX 2.8-4 28-75 which I don't mind too much.
Bought an original Series 1 but it was too big and heavy when used it with my Nikon F2A + MD + BP & Metz 45CT. Thus, I replaced it with a lighter & compact Tokina 70-200 f/2.8, that fell apart several decades later.
You're not seeing “the film”... you're seeing the film plus the digitizing plus the post-processing, compression, etc. It feels good to talk about being an “analog photographer,” but every image you see on the internet is a digital image. Chris easily could have made his digital-camera-original photos look indistinguishable from the ones that went through the intermediate step of film if that was what he had wanted. I enjoy messing around with film and film cameras as much as the next person, but we shouldn't kid ourselves that we're doing anything we couldn't have done with a digital original. On the other hand, if you're taking your film into a darkroom and making traditional wet prints, that's an entirely different art medium and more power to you...
I keep trying different blacks and white films but when it comes down to it Tri-X is still my favorite. If I’m traveling and the shots are going to be important Tri-X it is. I will probably try a couple rolls of this at some point though.
Thanks for the interesting review, guys! I loved film, I loved proper dials on cameras, but I love the readily availability of digital photography. Since I switched to Fujifilm cameras, I've again fallen in love with photography. Best of both worlds for me. Aperture dials, hurrah!!! (I still have a few rolls of tri-x which I (seldom) use with my good old Yashica Lynx 14E.)
Will never shoot film BUT I REALLY liked this review. It's like bringing family back into the conversation. Also let my eye see the difference - I know I know, this is viewing from a digital format, but for what it's worth I'm familiar w/ the difference already and can imagine what's being discussed here. Thanks
Great job Chris, most viewers might not have any experience shooting film much be less developing, I found the old acros to be excellent and fine grained also but usually had to add contrast in post. I've recently reviewed Lomography purple on my channel you might get a kick out of that also.
I like your take on film photography, shooting and developing. Just SHOOT and develop. I think some people get too caught up on everything being so technical. Edit: I agree with your take. The simulation looks totally different than the actual film. Way more contrasty almost has a panchro look. Congrats on the baby on the way!
I must criticize that you say that we will criticize you...no, seriously; I was really inspirerd to go and dig up my tanks and bottles again. Nothing like taking that film out the spool and looking at it for the first time. Thanks for a nice video 😊👍🏼
I never tried to develop my own film before. Nice to get a quick overview of what it looks like. But I can barely handle processing my digital images so I don't see myself trying film any time soon. I think I've got something like 300 images I haven't reviewed yet and probably another 50 still in the camera.
Nice job. No need to apologize or explain your film chemistry selection. You have a solid grasp on it and a good background. Nice shots too. Tell me which you prefer shooting with: FE w/MD-12 or F4s? More film stuff please!
Surreal I just ordered a roll of this yesterday! The previous Acros was fantastic. Thanks for this episode. Perhaps the Fuji simulation is better for video ?
I don't judge anyone for their choice of chemistry (except if you're using a monobath in which case don't talk to me /s) Great review, thanks for showing how it pushes
So how does the new Acros film compare to Fuji digital standard monochrome profile? I think they would be very similar indeed with the film at ASA100. The digital could almost certainly be tweaked to be nearly identical either in-camera of in post.
Silver FE w/ the MD-12, Same exact setup I have right in front of me as I speak. I too prefer the Tri-X as my go-to but sometimes Ilford Delta for something different. I gotta give this Acros II a shot in both 35mm and 120 in my 503cx
Contrast can be greatly influenced through the development. With Rodinal you should try 25+1 dilution and consider a different agitation technique/frequency.
I normally did 25 to 1 and it does give slightly more contrast and finer grain at the expense of accutance and highlight protection. But I figured 50 to 1 would be a good middle ground between what I like to do, and what the stand developers like to do.
Chris, I disagree when you say film is expensive, unless you're referring to the running costs. It's possible to acquire a good film camera and a set of 3 primes for 100 USD / GBP *less* than the cheapest recommended interchangeable lens camera on the DPReview website. That's plenty of money to buy, develop and print a good handful of rolls! 😊
I only shoot films available across more formats just so I can visualize the end result reguardless of camera. I shoot fairly exclusively FP4+, HP5+, Portra 400, and Ektachrome across 35mm, 645, and 4x5.
Great video, but a bit harsh on the Acros simulation. You can change contrast settings, add grain (which looks very natural) and use several filters (green, yellow, red) all while shooting JPEGs in camera. If you wanted it to look like the original film, you could easily do that without further editing (don't even need to shoot Raw files).
This reminds me - I need to watch John Cassavetes' film "Faces" (1968) again in which they used a lot of Kodak Tri-X black-and-white film stock for the night scenes. Does anybody make a Tri-X 400-type emulation?
Grea experience! (1) Is it true that old Fuji sensors like xpro1 or xe1 are producing better photo-film-like in black and white, rather than new ones x100v or xt4? (2) is it true that a pure monochrome sensor like Leica Q2 Monochrome, is providing much better black and white images rather than Fuji film simulation even after some manipulation in post?
Those memory cards are difficult to use :D :D Nice video, I really enjoy learning about the old school way of film. Never even thought about doing the development myself someday.
This was a lot of fun to watch, even if I don't own a Fuji X-series camera, and rarely shoot film any more ;) Acros fell somewhere between my two personal fave films - HP5+ 400 (lovely balanced tonality, great for general use) and Agfa APX 100 (more contrasty, but not extreme, with super fine grain) - with some of the great qualities of both. Still, it was a rare choice. Looking at Acros II, I think it's a little punchier, with more contrast, and I might like it more for street photography than old Acros, maybe architecture and possibly landscapes too. I'll be sure to give it a try in future. I'm sure Fuji must know exactly how they intended their film to be developed, and try to match their digital simulation to that, but to me, Fuji's film simulations never seem to be all that much like I remember the actual film to be. Of course, that probably doesn't mean too much considering that I didn't develop film myself, and instead sent them off to the lab.
I am in management school and i am doing a college report on the revive of B & W film photography, do you think there is a chance that B & W film photography can be revived, have a strong market and become a successful business?
What sorcery is this? I never think about that but just this morning I thought to myself it'd be nice to see a comparison between film simulations and the original :o
Not the Rodinal, or the fixer. They will sit in jugs until I can get them to the dump, where they have waste chemical facilities. I'm not too hung up in stop bath down the drain but you should definitely not pour fixer down. Developers vary, for example Kodak XTOL which is another one of my favorites is mostly vitamin C. But Rodinal is bad news for the fishies.
Chris Niccolls thanks, I had criticise something, right, lol, I found my old jug the other day, wish I could post a photo, has a chemical stain from 20 years ago, I am a bit sad the chemistry has gone, I can’t just can’t see reason to shoot film anymore, wish could find a reason
You kids and your fancy new technology. I'm sticking to good old fashioned digital. It's a nice looking film. I'd love to see some silver gelatin prints in person, as there is some magic there that digital printing and displays can't match.
A review for a film stock? Count me in! Is there really a controversy between plastic and steel? Maybe I spend too little time on the internet, but that is new to me. And also... do you wash for an hour? I normally do 5 rinses and keep it in the tank filled with water for 5 minutes - and repeat this 4 to 5 times (25 minutes). Is this too little washing?
I loved the look & feel of ACROS ll for Nikon F5 & F6 use. But of course it is very hard to find anywhere now...%^&*( I will keep eyes open to find it again though. XLNT video, thank you!
You can dodge and burn the paper during the printing process in the darkroom. You can also change overall contrast with graded or multigrade papers. At the time of processing you can change development times and shoot the film at higher or lower iso ratings and develop accordingly to adjust contrast too. In fact black and white film gives you so many different vectors to achieve a result that it becomes an art form into itself.
@@niccollsvideo thanks for responding! I would love if you guys did more videos on Film. I have a Nikon FG that was given to me and would really like to know more about hat film to use and the how processing and printing works. Again thanks Chris!
Very cool that a main stream channel is acknowledging that film is increasing in popularity, and without the covid drama , this year would have been a important year for film Sales ,film shooters and the niche in general..
Taylor Noel yer I hoping that not to much of the momentum that was building wont be lost .. it’s cool and fun that people old and young alike are comming back to film , especially embracing beautiful craftsmanship, design and innovation of past times and a general appreciation for how the medium produces images , it’s a great art and history lesson for us all ..
You are just testing the scanner, when you talk about the resolution. Acros specs to about 200 lp/mm. That’s a good deal more than any consumer digital camera ever. If, and only if the taking lens is great, tripod and/or high shutter speed is used. And at the other end, a superb scanner OR a good enlarger is used.
Helge Frisenette Any halfway decent scanner will fully image the film grain structure, at which point any further increase in resolution is purely theoretical... in other words, it just lets you see the grains better. Even a 24-megapixel digital-camera image invariably will have more fine detail.
J.L. Williams NO, NO AND NO! It is incredible how sticky and persistent these very damaging (to the medium of film) misconceptions are! Grain is not binary, and it is overlapping and of different sizes. To say that grain is the end of resolution, is the same as saying that tape hiss marks the end of frequency response on magnetic tape. There is also the very little discussed issue of grain aliasing. A visual artifact in the same family as interference patterns. It is an interaction between the much smaller grain structure and the big and regular pixels of the scanner array. If you are genuinely interested look up Tim Parkin and Henning Serger. They have written much, and done many tests that prove and illustrate the above. Have a look at what is possible with a pretty humble set up to scan film: transienteye.com/2018/07/30/optimising-film-scans-from-olympus-micro-4-3-cameras/ Quality film, hand held and scanned right holds at the very least the information equivalent of *real* 30 megapixels (not just theoretical sensor resolution). Under optimal circumstances it could be three times that. IE. 90 MP With specialty film, six times that. 180 MP. And we are still talking 36x24mm. The big problem for film is that rhe vast majority of scanners is absolutely terrible. And even the good ones are not *that* good and/or out of calibration. And, that very few people are optically/wet printing and if then, not on quality equipment. That is not to say that it is impossible to make good scanners. On the contrary, scanners are easier than ever to make cheaply and well. Drumscanners is essentially 60s technology. Flextight and flatbed scanners are 80s and 90s technology. Let’s just hope that someone will make a genuinely good, inexpensive scanner before long.
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
Having never shot film, I did not understand at least 80% of this video...absolutely loved it, keep it up guys!
Really enjoyed this. And your attitude of “it’s my party so stuff it” was soooo refreshing! Beautiful children, and congrats to whomever is about to have a baby join their family. 😊
Really liked that you left the "Thank you" right after taking this gentleman's image (around 1:40). It might be a small thing but I think it's an important gesture.
Hey guys! Nice to see you‘re checking out film. And nice to see an analogue Nikon FE at work. At the beginning of the year I bought a FE2 in a very good state and started again shooting film. And what can I say, it’s so much fun!!! The pics you’ve shot look pretty good and I would like to check out this new Acros II. But here in Europe it’s not so easy to get it. But anyway, thanks for your video! I would definitely appreciate to see more film related stuff from you😉✌️👋!
I've always thought the digital film simulation felt off, but it's interesting to see how much closer it is to the actual film when pushed to 400. Great video as usual, fellas!
Because you see these photos on a digital device. The prints would be like night and day.
@@summer_kid interesting point thanks
Always love the content you guys put out. Interesting and fun, plus you make it seem so effortless - like you just happened to be developing some Acros film when we stopped by for a coffee and a catch up. Amazingly high standards - in all circumstances. Somewhat akin to Fuji in fact, brilliantly carving out a niche and relevance in the new market-place.
Loved this! I know you're a digital channel but this was a lovely change of pace. Thanks!
PS you fix the hell out of it Chris and don't let anyone change ya ;)
Feels like film is coming back big time when dpreview posts a video on a new film stock.
Enjoyable video as usual. Acros didn't exist when I last shot film, but I do like the Fuji look. At home I used to prefer the Pattersons as they were easier to use. But out on the road as a photo journalist we used the steel tanks as they were very strong. As to washing for and hour..LOL We never had the time, films just of a cursory rinse before being dried with a hairdryer. I still have negs that 30 years after this treatment can still be printed.
Chris and Jordan, Just love your videos! I really don't care what the topic is... it's just like visiting with old friends.
Jack Strange very true. Been watching these fellas for many years now.
Thanks Jack! We really appreciate the viewers who have stick by us all these years!
1:05 Now THOSE are some Leading Lines! ;-)
Congrats Jordan and Evelyn. And nice experiments
I remember the tapping. Thank you, Chris!
Stunning portraits at 6:42 and 7:26. Congratulations Jordan!
love this review and would love to see more film / analogue photography reviews in the future!
Thank you for the review, the film looks amazing in my opinion. many things considering photography look amazing to me lately I don't know what's going on I have all around positive vibe somehow:D one of the rare things that stand out in a negative way to me still are harsh highlight. And I understand that the test had to be made with default settings but I wonder what would happen if you turn the contrast all the way down on the xt3?
Lovely to get in contact with the old film days again. I remember learning photography from my dad, he forced me to learn correct exposure because he didn't want to pay for bad pictures. Then I started to take two pictures of each subject (Just in case) and then he got angry again 😅 telling me that it was to expensive to pay for the same image twice! So I learned to get my shit together and trust myself 😁
I learnt on digital and my dad was pretty much the same expect instead of costing too much it cost him too much space on his laptop. Plus I had a 400D with a 128mb card so I got like 40 pics anyway so I guess I got the film experience
A Nikon FE with a winder. Be still my heart. The FE2 with winder is my favorite camera of all time.
Honestly these are some of your better shots. Great to see your shoot and develop film 💪
Joseph Asghar ha! I was thinking the same! He’s putting more effort, which makes sense.
Nice review! Push to 400 is definitely have a go. Glad to see more film review! Thank you!
This is a journey down memory lane for me - I had an FE and this motor drive too. I should never have bought the F3 which let me down … I've already bought a roll of 120 Acros II, let's see! Interesting way of moving the tank (here in Europe, it's more Jobo tanks, because the Paterson tanks are not as tight, therefor inversion does not work that well; yes, easier to load, but this is more true for 120 film, not so much for 35 mm).
OMG a trip down memory lane. I used to make a room into a darkroom, trays, chems, and B and W Tri Ex or Acros....in my college apartments. what fun!!!!! but THANK GOODNESS no more chemicals, only 32 photos per roll, always running to buy film, then if you did color? crap, to the local photo store. and more money. GOD BLESS DIGITAL REVOLUTION.
AMEN
I went back to film in 2017 with no regrets, digital sucks and is boring.
Honestly developing Acros in Rodinal is just brutal in my opinion. Rodinal is a great ad hoc developer, but produces a lot of really intensive grain whereas Acros was made to deliver fine tones and only very little grain. Try XTOL 1:1 next time and you'll get even better results. It's also a lot more environment friendly.
I've been really struggling. I shot film for 40 years and sold all my Nikon gear in 2006. I have been hankering about going back to film , but when I costed it all out, including investing in a good camera and a couple of lenses, scanner and the cost of film here in Australia at $25-30 a roll, I ran the white flag up and will be investing in a Fuji X-T100 and the 23mm f2. The Acros film simulation is enough for me.
Sorry that’s been so hard for you man. Have you tried buying in bulk rolls then DSLR scanning with your camera? Could be a viable option to scratch that film itch!
Developing? Actual film? This is so out my wheelhouse, but this video was truly fascinating. Great frickin photos! 👍
Kevin - The Basic Filmmaker Covid -19 project written all of it for you ;) mon Ami
Developing film nowadays is a walk in the park. Especially black and white. You need half a day or less to learn it
i don't understand why anyone would leave critical comments on a video like this?
Chris is doing a great job, and this is a Jordan+Chris video, they can develop film any way they like isn't it?
maybe Chris is just finish for people like me to leave comments?
Because the internet is, sadly, full of people who do nothing but talk shit so it's fair to assume that some people would criticize him.
Can you make an in depth video on the film development for beginners. As usual nice video.
Kannan A I’m pretty sure Matt Day and The Art of Photography both have great videos on basic development technique!
@@taylornoel Indeed, there are so many good resources online and in print.
Plus it will give them something todo...
Hey, Mate. Great video! Could you help me? Where do i find the lens mount scan that you used in one of the scenes ? Is it an adaptation ? Maybe a video about it would be nice! Tks!
Got you covered!
ruclips.net/video/dBWNgtxMlY0/видео.html
@@dpreview wooow!!! Thanks a lot!
Hello Chris,
thank’s a lot for the great video about the Acros.
Also thank’s a lot for the RAW-files from the scans on the gallery.
Would it be possible to give us the XT-3 RAW files also?
It would be a pleasure for me to play with them with the Fujifilm X RAW Studio.
Best regards and take care,
Alex
Excellent video...been follower for years! Thanks, Andrew
Thx, great pictures and surprised to see you have snow on the street. In Switzerland it's almost summer shorts and T shirts.
If you think '70's zooms suck," then you've never been near a Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm Macro Zoom. Particularly the ones whose serial number starts with "28." That's a Komine-built version, and is a legendary lens. I have one for both my K1000, and my 3 Nikons (F3, FE, and EM) and they are fabulous lenses.
In fact, that might be a good video subject- get the Series 1 built be the 3 big dogs - Kiron, Tokina, and Komine - and do a comparison. (Serials start with "22," "37," and "28," respectively.)
Probably change your opinion of how much "70's zooms suck."
..Joe
Thanks Joe! I did have the series 1 zoom. It was a 3.5 max aperture regardless and had amazing macro capability. I miss that one a lot. Some of the Kiron stuff was ok too. But for the most part they just didn't deliver good enough results for my liking. I do have a Tokina ATX 2.8-4 28-75 which I don't mind too much.
Bought an original Series 1 but it was too big and heavy when used it with my Nikon F2A + MD + BP & Metz 45CT. Thus, I replaced it with a lighter & compact Tokina 70-200 f/2.8, that fell apart several decades later.
Wow. The film looks waaay better for portraits! Didn't expect that much of a difference.
You're not seeing “the film”... you're seeing the film plus the digitizing plus the post-processing, compression, etc. It feels good to talk about being an “analog photographer,” but every image you see on the internet is a digital image. Chris easily could have made his digital-camera-original photos look indistinguishable from the ones that went through the intermediate step of film if that was what he had wanted. I enjoy messing around with film and film cameras as much as the next person, but we shouldn't kid ourselves that we're doing anything we couldn't have done with a digital original. On the other hand, if you're taking your film into a darkroom and making traditional wet prints, that's an entirely different art medium and more power to you...
@@jlwilliams Yeah, I know. I use film too :-)
I keep trying different blacks and white films but when it comes down to it Tri-X is still my favorite. If I’m traveling and the shots are going to be important Tri-X it is. I will probably try a couple rolls of this at some point though.
Great work, beautiful images 👍
Excellent video. Been thinking about doing a deep dive review of this stuff myself! I’d be fun to pull it also.
Do it.
Excellent video. As with most things analogue there is a palpability that digital struggles to capture.
This was really awesome, guys. Informative and inspiring - you really expanded my horizons with this.
Thanks for the great review. Beautiful example why film will never die
Hey Chris! Would love to see you guys doing a video printing some shots in a darkroom!
Thanks for the interesting review, guys!
I loved film, I loved proper dials on cameras, but I love the readily availability of digital photography. Since I switched to Fujifilm cameras, I've again fallen in love with photography. Best of both worlds for me.
Aperture dials, hurrah!!!
(I still have a few rolls of tri-x which I (seldom) use with my good old Yashica Lynx 14E.)
Will never shoot film BUT I REALLY liked this review. It's like bringing family back into the conversation. Also let my eye see the difference - I know I know, this is viewing from a digital format, but for what it's worth I'm familiar w/ the difference already and can imagine what's being discussed here. Thanks
Great job Chris, most viewers might not have any experience shooting film much be less developing, I found the old acros to be excellent and fine grained also but usually had to add contrast in post. I've recently reviewed Lomography purple on my channel you might get a kick out of that also.
Good work Chris! Film always looks better because it has a heel and a toe, your side by sides shows this advange well.
Did you hand crank the film while also having a winder on the bottom?
I like your take on film photography, shooting and developing. Just SHOOT and develop. I think some people get too caught up on everything being so technical.
Edit: I agree with your take. The simulation looks totally different than the actual film. Way more contrasty almost has a panchro look.
Congrats on the baby on the way!
It's nice, but I prefer a grittier black and white. Usually, I go with HP4, but I haven't shot enough of the others to conclude that it's the best.
How did you scan the negatives? I saw a quick shot of you using a digital camera -- what exact equipment did you use? The scans came out great!
Outstanding way of saying I develop the way I develop. Don’t complain it’s what I do.
I had questions about this film and this was the only source that answered my questions. Thank you!
I noticed Chris was using a camera attached scanner at the beginning of the video. What do you guys recommend to scan old negs?
I must criticize that you say that we will criticize you...no, seriously; I was really inspirerd to go and dig up my tanks and bottles again. Nothing like taking that film out the spool and looking at it for the first time. Thanks for a nice video 😊👍🏼
thanks guys, love it when you go back to film :)
I never tried to develop my own film before. Nice to get a quick overview of what it looks like. But I can barely handle processing my digital images so I don't see myself trying film any time soon. I think I've got something like 300 images I haven't reviewed yet and probably another 50 still in the camera.
Really enjoyed this type of video. More please!
Nice job. No need to apologize or explain your film chemistry selection. You have a solid grasp on it and a good background.
Nice shots too.
Tell me which you prefer shooting with: FE w/MD-12 or F4s?
More film stuff please!
I’d love to see some more film videos from you two ☺️✌🏽 thanks for this one
Surreal I just ordered a roll of this yesterday! The previous Acros was fantastic. Thanks for this episode. Perhaps the Fuji simulation is better for video ?
what developing time did you use for the pushed to 400 shots? would love to try to replicate those results myself!
My favourite black and white film stock 😍🎞
Nice vid again very interesting Chris. Love your reviews. 👍😉
I don't judge anyone for their choice of chemistry (except if you're using a monobath in which case don't talk to me /s) Great review, thanks for showing how it pushes
So how does the new Acros film compare to Fuji digital standard monochrome profile? I think they would be very similar indeed with the film at ASA100. The digital could almost certainly be tweaked to be nearly identical either in-camera of in post.
Snow at April? where are you guys situated?
Silver FE w/ the MD-12, Same exact setup I have right in front of me as I speak. I too prefer the Tri-X as my go-to but sometimes Ilford Delta for something different. I gotta give this Acros II a shot in both 35mm and 120 in my 503cx
Would you please provide links to the equipment and chemicals you used. Thank you for the videos
Nice...
Not having wetting agent?
Use a couple of drops of vinegar (synthetic). aka acetic acid...
Contrast can be greatly influenced through the development. With Rodinal you should try 25+1 dilution and consider a different agitation technique/frequency.
I normally did 25 to 1 and it does give slightly more contrast and finer grain at the expense of accutance and highlight protection. But I figured 50 to 1 would be a good middle ground between what I like to do, and what the stand developers like to do.
Hey Chris, curious as to how you scan you negatives... do you use a camera for scanning?
Greetings from Spain, Excellent video. I have a Nikpn FMII, can you tell me, please, what objective do you have the video (is to buy one) thanks
Chris, I disagree when you say film is expensive, unless you're referring to the running costs. It's possible to acquire a good film camera and a set of 3 primes for 100 USD / GBP *less* than the cheapest recommended interchangeable lens camera on the DPReview website. That's plenty of money to buy, develop and print a good handful of rolls! 😊
I only shoot films available across more formats just so I can visualize the end result reguardless of camera.
I shoot fairly exclusively FP4+, HP5+, Portra 400, and Ektachrome across 35mm, 645, and 4x5.
Really enjoyed this, great job guys
Great video, but a bit harsh on the Acros simulation. You can change contrast settings, add grain (which looks very natural) and use several filters (green, yellow, red) all while shooting JPEGs in camera. If you wanted it to look like the original film, you could easily do that without further editing (don't even need to shoot Raw files).
Chris, Congratulations !
This reminds me - I need to watch John Cassavetes' film "Faces" (1968) again in which they used a lot of Kodak Tri-X black-and-white film stock for the night scenes. Does anybody make a Tri-X 400-type emulation?
Grea experience! (1) Is it true that old Fuji sensors like xpro1 or xe1 are producing better photo-film-like in black and white, rather than new ones x100v or xt4? (2) is it true that a pure monochrome sensor like Leica Q2 Monochrome, is providing much better black and white images rather than Fuji film simulation even after some manipulation in post?
Pity there isn't an Agfapan 400 film simulation. Anyone know how I would customize on my XT 4 for that?
Those memory cards are difficult to use :D :D Nice video, I really enjoy learning about the old school way of film. Never even thought about doing the development myself someday.
This was a lot of fun to watch, even if I don't own a Fuji X-series camera, and rarely shoot film any more ;)
Acros fell somewhere between my two personal fave films - HP5+ 400 (lovely balanced tonality, great for general use) and Agfa APX 100 (more contrasty, but not extreme, with super fine grain) - with some of the great qualities of both. Still, it was a rare choice. Looking at Acros II, I think it's a little punchier, with more contrast, and I might like it more for street photography than old Acros, maybe architecture and possibly landscapes too. I'll be sure to give it a try in future.
I'm sure Fuji must know exactly how they intended their film to be developed, and try to match their digital simulation to that, but to me, Fuji's film simulations never seem to be all that much like I remember the actual film to be. Of course, that probably doesn't mean too much considering that I didn't develop film myself, and instead sent them off to the lab.
I am in management school and i am doing a college report on the revive of B & W film photography, do you think there is a chance that B & W film photography can be revived, have a strong market and become a successful business?
Fantastic! Finally YUUGE film love! Have fun out there y'all!!!!!
We need more analog review!
Thanks! that was a very refreshing watch! Maybe I'll pull out my "Texas Leica".....think I still have some Ilford Delta 100 in the fridge.....
What sorcery is this?
I never think about that but just this morning I thought to myself it'd be nice to see a comparison between film simulations and the original :o
Can you get the real Acros look in Capture One for Fujifilm?
So, what you do with the chemicals? Put them down the sink?
Not the Rodinal, or the fixer. They will sit in jugs until I can get them to the dump, where they have waste chemical facilities. I'm not too hung up in stop bath down the drain but you should definitely not pour fixer down. Developers vary, for example Kodak XTOL which is another one of my favorites is mostly vitamin C. But Rodinal is bad news for the fishies.
Chris Niccolls thanks, I had criticise something, right, lol, I found my old jug the other day, wish I could post a photo, has a chemical stain from 20 years ago, I am a bit sad the chemistry has gone, I can’t just can’t see reason to shoot film anymore, wish could find a reason
Who is Muster Point? And is he famous in Canada?
You kids and your fancy new technology. I'm sticking to good old fashioned digital.
It's a nice looking film. I'd love to see some silver gelatin prints in person, as there is some magic there that digital printing and displays can't match.
A review for a film stock? Count me in!
Is there really a controversy between plastic and steel? Maybe I spend too little time on the internet, but that is new to me. And also... do you wash for an hour? I normally do 5 rinses and keep it in the tank filled with water for 5 minutes - and repeat this 4 to 5 times (25 minutes). Is this too little washing?
Thanks guys, fun and interesting!
I loved the look & feel of ACROS ll for Nikon F5 & F6 use. But of course it is very hard to find anywhere now...%^&*( I will keep eyes open to find it again though. XLNT video, thank you!
This film is or may I say was one of my favourite stocks but now at $32 a roll in OZ, its ridiculously expensive, great video though.
Nice to see a film review, i went back to film in 2017 and i'm very happy, Digital is boring as hell.
1:16 solid effect !
can you dodge and burn the film to get it to match contrast a bit more?
You can dodge and burn the paper during the printing process in the darkroom. You can also change overall contrast with graded or multigrade papers. At the time of processing you can change development times and shoot the film at higher or lower iso ratings and develop accordingly to adjust contrast too. In fact black and white film gives you so many different vectors to achieve a result that it becomes an art form into itself.
@@niccollsvideo thanks for responding! I would love if you guys did more videos on Film. I have a Nikon FG that was given to me and would really like to know more about hat film to use and the how processing and printing works. Again thanks Chris!
Very cool that a main stream channel is acknowledging that film is increasing in popularity, and without the covid drama , this year would have been a important year for film
Sales ,film shooters and the niche in general..
Gaius Buterwohl I think it’s still can be a good year for film! Just gotta keep the manufacturers floating till the fire gets put out haha 🎞🎞🎞
Taylor Noel yer I hoping that not to much of the momentum that was building wont be lost .. it’s cool and fun that people old and young alike are comming back to film , especially embracing beautiful craftsmanship, design and innovation of past times and a general appreciation for how the medium produces images , it’s a great art and history lesson for us all ..
I have shot B&W film for over fifty years and the darkroom process still thrills me.
You are just testing the scanner, when you talk about the resolution.
Acros specs to about 200 lp/mm. That’s a good deal more than any consumer digital camera ever.
If, and only if the taking lens is great, tripod and/or high shutter speed is used. And at the other end, a superb scanner OR a good enlarger is used.
Helge Frisenette Any halfway decent scanner will fully image the film grain structure, at which point any further increase in resolution is purely theoretical... in other words, it just lets you see the grains better. Even a 24-megapixel digital-camera image invariably will have more fine detail.
J.L. Williams NO, NO AND NO!
It is incredible how sticky and persistent these very damaging (to the medium of film) misconceptions are!
Grain is not binary, and it is overlapping and of different sizes.
To say that grain is the end of resolution, is the same as saying that tape hiss marks the end of frequency response on magnetic tape.
There is also the very little discussed issue of grain aliasing. A visual artifact in the same family as interference patterns.
It is an interaction between the much smaller grain structure and the big and regular pixels of the scanner array.
If you are genuinely interested look up Tim Parkin and Henning Serger.
They have written much, and done many tests that prove and illustrate the above.
Have a look at what is possible with a pretty humble set up to scan film:
transienteye.com/2018/07/30/optimising-film-scans-from-olympus-micro-4-3-cameras/
Quality film, hand held and scanned right holds at the very least the information equivalent of *real* 30 megapixels (not just theoretical sensor resolution).
Under optimal circumstances it could be three times that. IE. 90 MP
With specialty film, six times that. 180 MP.
And we are still talking 36x24mm.
The big problem for film is that rhe vast majority of scanners is absolutely terrible. And even the good ones are not *that* good and/or out of calibration.
And, that very few people are optically/wet printing and if then, not on quality equipment.
That is not to say that it is impossible to make good scanners.
On the contrary, scanners are easier than ever to make cheaply and well.
Drumscanners is essentially 60s technology.
Flextight and flatbed scanners are 80s and 90s technology.
Let’s just hope that someone will make a genuinely good, inexpensive scanner before long.
🇳🇱👍good test and the velvia????