@@alvareo92 Yep, it was shot on Double X, I just looked it up. From an article in Hollywood Reporter: "To achieve the film's vintage look and texture, Blaschke chose to shoot with the rarely used Kodak Double-X 35mm film to capture a "unique signature that you can't get any other way." But carrying viewers to another time took more than just highly specific film stock. "I also had some custom filters made to emulate film stock that doesn't exist anymore, that went out of production in the '20s," he says. "It was to pull you into the past.""
No, The Lighthouse (2019) was shot with Kodak 5222 “Double X” which is not orthochromatic film, but a panchromatic 35mm Motion Picture Stock; To achieve a orthochromatic look, they had a custom “Teal” lens filter that filtered both green and blue light to realize the effect. Your second sentence is spot on though, especially when Dafoe near the very end of the film.
Thanks for the review, I have been eagerly waiting on mine to arrive and am looking forward to trying it out. Please do a follow up with more landscapes, the last two images taken on your trip looked fantastic.
Definitely an acutance problem. I have found that some films don't like being processed in some developers. It's probably the case with the combination Matt used. I'd really like to know what developer he used?
That being said I think he outsources his develop and scan these days so it could be anything. Hc110 and rodinal both have minimal grain dissolving characteristics so they would likely give him better acutance.
True, it’s nearly impossible to compare / review a BW film without its developer + method... that can drastically affect the process and there are so many possibilities. (vs C41 and E6 which are standardized)
Irs called acutance, and it's best developed in Rodinal diluted 1:50 9 minutes at 68 degrees. That will make it pop. Also, try a 47 blue cutoff filter you might like the effects.
Good job on this Matt, and I appreciate you keeping it real about the grain and the film's shortcomings. When I got back into film three years ago I went straight to medium format thinking it was the best but recently I've started shooting fine-grained films like T-Maxx in my leica 3F and I realize I was dead wrong about 35 mm. I haven't touched my medium format since 😊
I played with a couple rolls of svema blue and used both hc110 and TD3 technical pan developer from photographers formulary and the grain is superbly sharp with TD3. being as how they are both Ortho films, I'd definitely try the TD3 on the Ilford, it may be key to getting the look and feel you wanted
Thanks for testing this new film. I'm headed to New Mexico in March and looking for a good film that will help complement the reds. I'll definitely give it a try. Additional, intentional testing on your end would be helpful and appreciated.
Matt, Grab “The edge of Darkness” by Barry Thornton. He explains why grain is necessary for visual sharpness. The low grain films don’t give the eye something to latch onto, so they may resolve more detail, but it’s “fuzzy” in visual appearance compared to something like an HP5 or Tri X. The book is DEFINITELY worthwhile. Maybe this is a film that would benefit from a developer like TX-2 or Rodinal to enhance the grain slightly.
@Bobby Brady I shot wedding photographs on medium format cameras back in the 1980's. We had our own lab and I could see with my own eyes that finer grain film can produce prints that "appear" fuzzier. Just go read this Wikipedia article about acutance: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acutance. You can increase the acutance in film by developing it in a different developer or by using less agitation and longer development times in the development process. That's why even in digital photography you have sliders to add "sharpness" (greater acutance) to an image in Lightroom. @christophercoppola knows what he is talking about.
In contrast to the "fuzzy" grain you mentioned here: Which films do you think have the "sharpest" grain? For color film I always thought Kodachrome had a sharp looking grain, but fro B&W I'm not sure.
It would be amazing if you set up a blog or something with all the shots we see in your videos in their original size. Maybe only make them immediately available for each video for members of your channel and for everyone like two weeks later or so. That really would be helpful and also a win-win for you and your viewers.
Loved the video, have been very interested to hear your thoughts and see your results with the film since it was announced, and would love to see some more shots in an ideal situation!
I would be super interested to see a video with this film used for landscapes. I do like that you tried to use it as a day to day film; I really liked a lot of the results. But I would like to see this film in its element. Thanks for another great video!
Mat, good review and interesting testing method, two different cameras two different photographers, with the same film. The grain issue the you continue to bring up is simply the eye of the beholder, meaning as a photographer your professional eye sees something that to you affects clearity, while a client or buyer will see other.
I think I’d normally want the opposite? Higher sensitivity to yellow/orange and lower to blue/green. That’s why i like the orange filter look. You want to darken blown out skies and lighten skin tones
two things. 1) love the way you hold a camera. It is very stable, and camera is designed to keep your nose out of the way. (I am left eye dominant, and cameras are designed to place my nose into the back of the camera. 2) what developer did you use, and agitation technique? Also, wonder if this Ilford ortho film will be offered in 100 foot rolls.
I’m rather late to this party, however, really nice video with interesting results. I’m really intrigued by the photos and would like to see more results with this film. Great job! Thanks Matt.
Ortho is not new. It is not a new film, just a repackaged/resized film. Any updates the film companies want to make is great! I'm happy to see more people using film and learning the darkroom arts in a wet lab!
I find it odd that some people think it's not good for portraits. Basically, right out of the box you're getting the same effect as a panchromatic film with a green filter, which is often recommended for darkening skin tones in portraits. Either way, an ortho or a pan film with a green filter, you're getting less sensitivity to reds and more sensitivity to blues and greens. Yeah, I think it would be interesting to see more of this film in landscape situations. I like how the blown out sky gives it an old-fashioned look and a kind of dreamy soft light.
Very interesting! I had no idea that Ilford would release a new film, even an ortho one! Until now there were only a few orthochromatic film stocks available, one of which, Rollei Ortho Plus, I'm currently testing. On a note of orthochromatic films: I realized, when you showed the photos from darker foliage like pine needles, that the sensitivity to green light that ilford refers to on their site seems to not be a thing for dark greens that tend to be kind of blue. Interestingly these kinds of greens are the same that a friend of mine regularly mistakes for browns or dark reds, because he has a unique issue with his sight of color (not your typical red/green issue, something far more complicated as it seems to me). But light greens that shift to yellow should in my mind render lighter on orthochromatic films, if Ilford states that the film would be sensitive to green light, right? I might have to test that. Interestingly again, said friend of mine also regularly mistakes certain yellows with certain light greens, and I suppose, based on all of the above, that these colors and tones are the same that would render light on ortho films. Anyway, thanks for making this video! It was interesting to see your first impressions and some of the first images made with the film. You keep doing a good job with this, as usual!
This friend of yours seems to have a similar issue to myself. I am technically red/green colour blind (I call it colour confused but that'll never catch on!) and yet it is so much more than that simple definition. I could go into a lot more depth here but I will save you from a long message by trying to simplify it for you. Anything with red or green in it will have an issue for me. Oranges, blues (turquoise, teal, aqua etc), purples, browns, pinks, even gold etc usually appear as the more predominant colour eg, red, blue, green. I can see colours pretty accurately in daylight but it gets much worse in low light. There are different types of colour blindness, the rarest being not being able to see colour at all just shades of grey. I've shot with Ortho a few times now and I quite like the look. I've pushed it to 200 without a problem (Ilford even gives you dev times for that speed). Unlike Matt though, I quite like the grain however, I do agree, it is quite pricey for a black and white film.
I thought the grain looked different too. I didn’t really notice it until I started looking at it with my grain magnifier in the darkroom. But overall it’s not bad. I’ve also done some experimenting with portraits as well. If you’d like to see a couple I could send them to you.
My brother was kind enough to send me a roll in 120 from the UK. It hasn’t arrived in stores where I live yet. It’s sitting in the fridge until I figure out what I’m going to shoot with it. I’m also a big HP5 fan and shoot it a lot at 1600. And yes I’d like to see another vid on this film, maybe with your 67
I’d love to see how this film performs in situations it’s supposed to be meant for. So a big YES for a hike video. That said, I’m not that well versed in B&W films, they all kinda look the same to me, but I enjoyed the video. I can see what you mean when you say it isn’t as sharp. HP5 definitely has a nice, sharp character to it.
I shot my first roll of Ortho Plus a week ago. I was able to shoot in high contrast sunlight. To be honest, there was nothing that made it stand out head and shoulders above PanF and Tri-X. I shot the covered bridges of Ashtabula County and only one of them was red. Actually it was a light orange and really didn’t render too dark. I’ve got another roll and I may get one for my Minolta Autocord and photograph some red covered bridges and barns. But other than that, I share your opinion that while it looks nice, there’s nothing about it to make me want to dump PanF and Tri-X.
Do you evaluate the grain at negative scans? Or do yo print them analogue? Asking because in Print the grain is much more less then in Negative scans. I find the orthoeffect is not for everytime but can used for special purposes. i would love if Ilford makes a real IR film like the EFKE 820IR which is unfortunately not in production anymore...
We used to use a green filter with Ortho film when shooting portraits ro correct it's colour inbalance. This would be around the 1950s and not with a shit minuature film camera like you got there. We used the King Sized 120 film. A Rollei or a Plaubel Makina
Hey Matt. Newly subscribed. Really like your approach, the honesty, openness and encouragement to think positive and do things for the right reasons in photography. I do have one question: You mentioned in another video that if you weren't doing this for a living and film prices shot up, you'd rethink things; excluding the paid gigs, has it ever been tough to justify the costs of shooting film over the past 5 years, especially with a growing family? I've shot the M9 professionally, now have a Q and my first analog (Pentax MX), but considering going fully analog. Thanks for any personal insights you can drop & cheers from an American in Sweden.
The grain quality you are trying to describe is acutance. Rodinal is a (very) high acutance developer. Microdol is (was?) a low acutance developer. As Ortho is a low speed film Rodinal would be a good choice.
Would a portrait of somebody with red hair turn into fully pitch dark hair with this film? My impression is yes since in your shown photos (for example the one with the duck or the red houses) all red tones turned out nearly black.
I have tried it in 35mm and 120 format, the low speed do not make this film for every day situations, I shot some landscape with it and the tripod was a must to get that sharpness. Since I shot a lot of landscape in 120, I will use it again but as a 35mm film, not sure, I prefer faster film and not being at the mercy of light on cloudy day
Great video Matt! I had a question on this film, and Ilford has yet to answer... I'm often using an orange filter, since this is not as sensitive to reds, will this underexpose even more than 2 stops? Anyone try this yet?
Very good review. Great work. What kind of scanner do you use? I have a Nikon Coolscan V but it broke down and Nikon India is unable to fix it. So I am looking for a new scanner. Unfortunately, Nikon has stopped making those scanners.
I'm getting major Explosions in the Sky vibes, which gives me major Friday Night Lights feel. Really considering diving into more than just HP5. This may have pushed me over the edge.
Ilford Ortho is not a new film, I used a couple of boxes about 25 years ago. What is new is that it is now available in 35 mm and 120 roll formats; it used to be in sheet form only, 5x4 and 10x8; I’m not sure if there was anything larger. It was mainly intended for copying continuous tone monochromatic photographs and artwork.
Lomography also released Potsdam (ISO 100, while Berlin is ISO 400). Silberra is a Russian company that have a range of films. I have shot their Pan 160 and U400. The Pan160 is nice but I find the U400 base is far too thin for my liking though. FPP or The Film Photography Project is releasing old Kodak films. Nik & Trick are doing something similar. Washi have a range of films too. Some of it on Japanese Gampi paper (goodness knows how that'll work). StreetCandy ATM400 is as it says it is, old ATM film repackaged to use in a 35mm film camera. And Svema is a Ukrainian company that also has a range of mainly black and white film. There are others but I can't remember them. I hope this helps :).
@@Tinderchaff Thank you! Will have a look at FPP, sounds interesting! Have shot a few lomography films in the past but they seem to be quite expensive for what you get, might just be typical UK prices. Never heard of the other companies but will check them out :)
@@SPARKEDZZZ Ah you live in the UK too? Excellent! If you live in or anywhere near London I highly recommend The Photographers Gallery or Aperture Printing. Aperture has a decent range but the Photographers Gallery shop (not their website which basically has instant film) is far more extensive. Yeah, Lomo prices are a little much, I guess I'm just a sucker for old/new film :).
You NEED to shoot someone with Blue eyes. The effect is absolutely stunning! I hope to see more Ortho tests in the future!
Michael DeRose does the blue in the eyes go bright? @6:33
@@bthemedia They go almost translucent. It's pretty striking.
The Lighthouse was shot with orthochromatic film IIRC. Since it darkened skin tones it gave Pattinson and Dafoe a more dirty and grizzled look
Everyone said it was Kodak 5222, hey
Kodak hasn't mass produced ortho cine film since the early 30s, and the only B&W cine stock you can get now is Double-X
@@alvareo92 Yep, it was shot on Double X, I just looked it up. From an article in Hollywood Reporter:
"To achieve the film's vintage look and texture, Blaschke chose to shoot with the rarely used Kodak Double-X 35mm film to capture a "unique signature that you can't get any other way."
But carrying viewers to another time took more than just highly specific film stock. "I also had some custom filters made to emulate film stock that doesn't exist anymore, that went out of production in the '20s," he says. "It was to pull you into the past.""
great movie
No, The Lighthouse (2019) was shot with Kodak 5222 “Double X” which is not orthochromatic film, but a panchromatic 35mm Motion Picture Stock; To achieve a orthochromatic look, they had a custom “Teal” lens filter that filtered both green and blue light to realize the effect.
Your second sentence is spot on though, especially when Dafoe near the very end of the film.
“Hey man what format do you shoot?”
“Big boi”
Kyle Fang Ilford is also great in their annual Ultra Large Format order! 11x14, 16x20... etc. “Ultra Big Bois”
amazing results dude!✨
I really like the tonality of this. With blue and green rendering it's really made for landscapes.
Thanks for the review, I have been eagerly waiting on mine to arrive and am looking forward to trying it out. Please do a follow up with more landscapes, the last two images taken on your trip looked fantastic.
4:09 You're probably referring to acutance (or lack thereof). You could use a developer like Rodinal to get more acutance.
Definitely an acutance problem. I have found that some films don't like being processed in some developers. It's probably the case with the combination Matt used. I'd really like to know what developer he used?
He mostly uses ilford's formulation of the classic kodak hc110 developer.
That being said I think he outsources his develop and scan these days so it could be anything. Hc110 and rodinal both have minimal grain dissolving characteristics so they would likely give him better acutance.
He sends everything to the Darkroom since he was at the Film Paideia. And the darkroom usually uses Ilford or D76. I don’t remember which...
True, it’s nearly impossible to compare / review a BW film without its developer + method... that can drastically affect the process and there are so many possibilities. (vs C41 and E6 which are standardized)
Really liking the results you got from this film, definitely one to try! Would love to see a hiking video for some landscape shots too.
Irs called acutance, and it's best developed in Rodinal diluted 1:50 9 minutes at 68 degrees. That will make it pop. Also, try a 47 blue cutoff filter you might like the effects.
Definitely would enjoy a follow up video. All in all great job Matt.
Your RUclips channel inspires me too keep getting good at shooting RUclips vids and learning more and more about photography!
Will definitely wanna see a follow up video! Thanks for sharing!
Thanks for the video Matt! Stoked on new and old films coming out!! 🤘🏼
Happy Birthday Matt!
Hocking Hills is a stunning place. I live near it, well the park in Ohio with Old Mans Cave.
Good job on this Matt, and I appreciate you keeping it real about the grain and the film's shortcomings. When I got back into film three years ago I went straight to medium format thinking it was the best but recently I've started shooting fine-grained films like T-Maxx in my leica 3F and I realize I was dead wrong about 35 mm. I haven't touched my medium format since 😊
I’d like to test this with high contrast light for portraits.
I really like the look of this film! I’m definitely going to grab a few soon.
I played with a couple rolls of svema blue and used both hc110 and TD3 technical pan developer from photographers formulary and the grain is superbly sharp with TD3. being as how they are both Ortho films, I'd definitely try the TD3 on the Ilford, it may be key to getting the look and feel you wanted
Thanks for testing this new film. I'm headed to New Mexico in March and looking for a good film that will help complement the reds. I'll definitely give it a try. Additional, intentional testing on your end would be helpful and appreciated.
I really like how the greens were rendered. Looks like it would work well for architecture too.
Matt, Grab “The edge of Darkness” by Barry Thornton. He explains why grain is necessary for visual sharpness. The low grain films don’t give the eye something to latch onto, so they may resolve more detail, but it’s “fuzzy” in visual appearance compared to something like an HP5 or Tri X. The book is DEFINITELY worthwhile. Maybe this is a film that would benefit from a developer like TX-2 or Rodinal to enhance the grain slightly.
@Bobby Brady I shot wedding photographs on medium format cameras back in the 1980's. We had our own lab and I could see with my own eyes that finer grain film can produce prints that "appear" fuzzier. Just go read this Wikipedia article about acutance: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acutance. You can increase the acutance in film by developing it in a different developer or by using less agitation and longer development times in the development process. That's why even in digital photography you have sliders to add "sharpness" (greater acutance) to an image in Lightroom. @christophercoppola knows what he is talking about.
In contrast to the "fuzzy" grain you mentioned here: Which films do you think have the "sharpest" grain? For color film I always thought Kodachrome had a sharp looking grain, but fro B&W I'm not sure.
It would be amazing if you set up a blog or something with all the shots we see in your videos in their original size. Maybe only make them immediately available for each video for members of your channel and for everyone like two weeks later or so.
That really would be helpful and also a win-win for you and your viewers.
I use to work for Ilford, I miss it. If you get the chance to visit the factory for a tour, I think you would love it
Loved the video, have been very interested to hear your thoughts and see your results with the film since it was announced, and would love to see some more shots in an ideal situation!
Would like to see how it reacts to push processing.
I would be super interested to see a video with this film used for landscapes. I do like that you tried to use it as a day to day film; I really liked a lot of the results. But I would like to see this film in its element. Thanks for another great video!
I genuinely appreciate that you didn't use generic lofi beats in your video, thanks.
Can you do a video about how you store all your photos?
Thanks for the review Matt, would like to see a hiking video with this film. Cheers!
Mat, good review and interesting testing method, two different cameras two different photographers, with the same film. The grain issue the you continue to bring up is simply the eye of the beholder, meaning as a photographer your professional eye sees something that to you affects clearity, while a client or buyer will see other.
I think I’d normally want the opposite? Higher sensitivity to yellow/orange and lower to blue/green. That’s why i like the orange filter look. You want to darken blown out skies and lighten skin tones
I liked the way those prints looked.
two things. 1) love the way you hold a camera. It is very stable, and camera is designed to keep your nose out of the way. (I am left eye dominant, and cameras are designed to place my nose into the back of the camera.
2) what developer did you use, and agitation technique?
Also, wonder if this Ilford ortho film will be offered in 100 foot rolls.
I’m rather late to this party, however, really nice video with interesting results. I’m really intrigued by the photos and would like to see more results with this film. Great job! Thanks Matt.
I'd watch another video on this film. I'd love to see you take it on a hike.
Ortho is not new. It is not a new film, just a repackaged/resized film. Any updates the film companies want to make is great! I'm happy to see more people using film and learning the darkroom arts in a wet lab!
I find it odd that some people think it's not good for portraits. Basically, right out of the box you're getting the same effect as a panchromatic film with a green filter, which is often recommended for darkening skin tones in portraits. Either way, an ortho or a pan film with a green filter, you're getting less sensitivity to reds and more sensitivity to blues and greens.
Yeah, I think it would be interesting to see more of this film in landscape situations. I like how the blown out sky gives it an old-fashioned look and a kind of dreamy soft light.
Might be good for subjects with rosacea or other skin issues. Of course early 20th century glamor portraits would be just the ticket.
I'd love to see some med format portraits on this! :)
I just posted a video about this. Check it out, if you're interested.
Very interesting! I had no idea that Ilford would release a new film, even an ortho one! Until now there were only a few orthochromatic film stocks available, one of which, Rollei Ortho Plus, I'm currently testing.
On a note of orthochromatic films: I realized, when you showed the photos from darker foliage like pine needles, that the sensitivity to green light that ilford refers to on their site seems to not be a thing for dark greens that tend to be kind of blue. Interestingly these kinds of greens are the same that a friend of mine regularly mistakes for browns or dark reds, because he has a unique issue with his sight of color (not your typical red/green issue, something far more complicated as it seems to me). But light greens that shift to yellow should in my mind render lighter on orthochromatic films, if Ilford states that the film would be sensitive to green light, right? I might have to test that. Interestingly again, said friend of mine also regularly mistakes certain yellows with certain light greens, and I suppose, based on all of the above, that these colors and tones are the same that would render light on ortho films.
Anyway, thanks for making this video! It was interesting to see your first impressions and some of the first images made with the film. You keep doing a good job with this, as usual!
This friend of yours seems to have a similar issue to myself. I am technically red/green colour blind (I call it colour confused but that'll never catch on!) and yet it is so much more than that simple definition. I could go into a lot more depth here but I will save you from a long message by trying to simplify it for you. Anything with red or green in it will have an issue for me. Oranges, blues (turquoise, teal, aqua etc), purples, browns, pinks, even gold etc usually appear as the more predominant colour eg, red, blue, green. I can see colours pretty accurately in daylight but it gets much worse in low light.
There are different types of colour blindness, the rarest being not being able to see colour at all just shades of grey.
I've shot with Ortho a few times now and I quite like the look. I've pushed it to 200 without a problem (Ilford even gives you dev times for that speed). Unlike Matt though, I quite like the grain however, I do agree, it is quite pricey for a black and white film.
Great stuff, man. I've yet to shoot it in 35mm, but I've loved the results from 120.
2:48 I can’t of my head how this shade of brown looks exactly like a band aid, and now neither can you 🩹
Just got one recently from my wife as a gift, so I'm looking forward to shoot some landscapes with it :)
I thought the grain looked different too. I didn’t really notice it until I started looking at it with my grain magnifier in the darkroom. But overall it’s not bad. I’ve also done some experimenting with portraits as well. If you’d like to see a couple I could send them to you.
My brother was kind enough to send me a roll in 120 from the UK. It hasn’t arrived in stores where I live yet. It’s sitting in the fridge until I figure out what I’m going to shoot with it. I’m also a big HP5 fan and shoot it a lot at 1600. And yes I’d like to see another vid on this film, maybe with your 67
wow i am excited, didnt know ilford was gonna release a new film
I’d love to see how this film performs in situations it’s supposed to be meant for. So a big YES for a hike video. That said, I’m not that well versed in B&W films, they all kinda look the same to me, but I enjoyed the video. I can see what you mean when you say it isn’t as sharp. HP5 definitely has a nice, sharp character to it.
Man I want that 85mm for my Nikon F. Dope video!
Good work, Matt!
Great images, when I shot ortho a few weeks ago I don't think I got the best out of it, wanna try it again!
I shot my first roll of Ortho Plus a week ago. I was able to shoot in high contrast sunlight. To be honest, there was nothing that made it stand out head and shoulders above PanF and Tri-X. I shot the covered bridges of Ashtabula County and only one of them was red. Actually it was a light orange and really didn’t render too dark. I’ve got another roll and I may get one for my Minolta Autocord and photograph some red covered bridges and barns. But other than that, I share your opinion that while it looks nice, there’s nothing about it to make me want to dump PanF and Tri-X.
Do you evaluate the grain at negative scans? Or do yo print them analogue? Asking because in Print the grain is much more less then in Negative scans.
I find the orthoeffect is not for everytime but can used for special purposes.
i would love if Ilford makes a real IR film like the EFKE 820IR which is unfortunately not in production anymore...
I’d love to see more videos on this film :-)
Looks pretty sharp to me? Grain, not obtrusive at all. Pleasing to the eye I thought. Now this film would really shine with LF and architecture.
This is the film that many early photos by great photographers were made
Definitely want to see more of this film. Speaking of replacing HP5, have you tried Bergger Pancro 400?
We used to use a green filter with Ortho film when shooting portraits ro correct it's colour inbalance.
This would be around the 1950s and not with a shit minuature film camera like you got there.
We used the King Sized 120 film.
A Rollei or a Plaubel Makina
Sheeeesh, this film seems to be what I’ve been looking for in a bw stock
I've been shooting expired Kodalith, Kodak's ortho film, at a whopping iso 6, contrasty as fcuk, real harsh but interesting look
I wonder how Ortho Plus will work with long exposure?
Hey Matt. Newly subscribed. Really like your approach, the honesty, openness and encouragement to think positive and do things for the right reasons in photography. I do have one question: You mentioned in another video that if you weren't doing this for a living and film prices shot up, you'd rethink things; excluding the paid gigs, has it ever been tough to justify the costs of shooting film over the past 5 years, especially with a growing family? I've shot the M9 professionally, now have a Q and my first analog (Pentax MX), but considering going fully analog. Thanks for any personal insights you can drop & cheers from an American in Sweden.
I would love to buy this ortho plus
the grain is called, mushi. What was the develpoer?
How was this film processed?
hmm, might be good to try this film developed with Rodinal.
Are they compatible with mamiya c220??
My camera doesnt have 1/80 Could I shoot it in 1/50 or maybe even 1/100? Im pretty new to film photography. Please forgive me if I sound uninformed.
Matt really sealed that envelope
Matt really seized the day.
Looks pretty good. Hard to get excited about B&W film stocks. But I think I may try it. Prob will stick to tri x though.
Years ago Kodak made a PanX black and white film with a low asa/iso.
i just throw on a yellow (k2) and a PL and i get some pretty good ortho results from HP5. i meter at 50 iso.
On which lens is the first take of this video shot? Thanks for the nice video!
YESSSS¡¡¡ Next Acros II
Very curious to use this for rocky mountains or the band lands
All these places look oddly familiar
Nice video
Yeah I’ve been told that this film isn’t great for skin tones but you clearly made it work, great job 👍
Matt, quick question- which film stock should I buy for taking an exterior picture of Carl's?
Ektar!
LOMO 800 would be a solid choice.
What strap is that ?
The grain quality you are trying to describe is acutance. Rodinal is a (very) high acutance developer. Microdol is (was?) a low acutance developer. As Ortho is a low speed film Rodinal would be a good choice.
Hi, what song are you using for bg?
Would a portrait of somebody with red hair turn into fully pitch dark hair with this film? My impression is yes since in your shown photos (for example the one with the duck or the red houses) all red tones turned out nearly black.
For sure would watch a hiking video with this stock. Or really any video. About any stock.
I have tried it in 35mm and 120 format, the low speed do not make this film for every day situations, I shot some landscape with it and the tripod was a must to get that sharpness. Since I shot a lot of landscape in 120, I will use it again but as a 35mm film, not sure, I prefer faster film and not being at the mercy of light on cloudy day
Large format ortho?
Great video Matt! I had a question on this film, and Ilford has yet to answer... I'm often using an orange filter, since this is not as sensitive to reds, will this underexpose even more than 2 stops? Anyone try this yet?
What did you develop this film in?
Does it come in 120 format?
Very good review. Great work.
What kind of scanner do you use? I have a Nikon Coolscan V but it broke down and Nikon India is unable to fix it. So I am looking for a new scanner. Unfortunately, Nikon has stopped making those scanners.
Does anyone know if that is the 35mm Leica summicron? If so, which version? Thanks.
he mentions the exact model in the beginning
@@alvareo92 thanks
dig the shadows
The contrast of this film looks quite nice. However, I am partial to grainier film stocks.
I'm getting major Explosions in the Sky vibes, which gives me major Friday Night Lights feel. Really considering diving into more than just HP5. This may have pushed me over the edge.
No need to worry about dusty or scratched sensors. A new sensor for every shot.
Ilford Ortho is not a new film, I used a couple of boxes about 25 years ago. What is new is that it is now available in 35 mm and 120 roll formats; it used to be in sheet form only, 5x4 and 10x8; I’m not sure if there was anything larger.
It was mainly intended for copying continuous tone monochromatic photographs and artwork.
Did you dev the film yourself?
Process it in Rodinol to solve the grain issue.
I would argue that 'cold and gloomy' is ideal conditions for black and white film. 😀
Anyone know of any other new films that are being released? (or rereleased)
Lomography also released Potsdam (ISO 100, while Berlin is ISO 400). Silberra is a Russian company that have a range of films. I have shot their Pan 160 and U400. The Pan160 is nice but I find the U400 base is far too thin for my liking though. FPP or The Film Photography Project is releasing old Kodak films. Nik & Trick are doing something similar. Washi have a range of films too. Some of it on Japanese Gampi paper (goodness knows how that'll work). StreetCandy ATM400 is as it says it is, old ATM film repackaged to use in a 35mm film camera. And Svema is a Ukrainian company that also has a range of mainly black and white film. There are others but I can't remember them. I hope this helps :).
@@Tinderchaff Thank you! Will have a look at FPP, sounds interesting! Have shot a few lomography films in the past but they seem to be quite expensive for what you get, might just be typical UK prices. Never heard of the other companies but will check them out :)
@@SPARKEDZZZ Ah you live in the UK too? Excellent! If you live in or anywhere near London I highly recommend The Photographers Gallery or Aperture Printing. Aperture has a decent range but the Photographers Gallery shop (not their website which basically has instant film) is far more extensive. Yeah, Lomo prices are a little much, I guess I'm just a sucker for old/new film :).
What Developer did you used?