ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 มิ.ย. 2024
- Took me a while to get to know this film, but now that I have, I like it!
That moment the first film emerged from the developing tank totally freaked me out! I was not expecting the film base to be so dark. But after trying it first with Bellini Euro HC, and then with Ilford Ilfosol 3, and getting the same dark filmbase both times, I have accepted that it’s supposed to look like that.
I think it’s something to do with the “Kino” label, and the intention to resemble a cine film, a motion picture film, in character. Not sure, does anyone know??
This whole grain thing has definitely got my brain going. Do we like grain? Is grain good? I can’t decide.
There’s no doubt grain gives character, but at the expense of acutance, or sharpness, and contrast. I’ve spent most of my film photography days so far trying to avoid grain, where I can. But maybe I’ve been wrong.
Huge thanks to Bec, fantastic model! You can find her here:
purpleport.com/portfolio/ivyh...
You can find Lomography here:
www.lomography.com
And specifically you can find Lomography Berlin 400 here:
shop.lomography.com/uk/berlin...
Let me know your thoughts on all this grain business in the coments!
![[Watch Party] RoV APL 2024 Bacon VS Earena](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/I5XAoIs-r6o/mqdefault.jpg)
Wicked video bro 🤝 very interesting again!
Cheers mate! Appreciate it
maybe it's a film that's supposed to be reversal processed - that the grey base dissolves in the removing of the first developed silver grains (like in foma r100). Reversal processing also always gives much finer grain than negative processing of the same stock.
The only time I shot Berlin Kino was back in 2019 and in 35mm. It was developed in Rodinal and was a bit grainy, the negatives look fine, no where as dark or grainy as your 120 shots. Lomography are know for changing emulsions over the years and the 2019 version could be different to todays.
I shot Berlin a few years go as well, and have no memory of the negatives being like this. I would have to do a lot of digging through negative folders to work out how long ago that was. Pre 2019 I suspect. The guys at Lomography are taking a look at the video, and are going to let me know if I screwed up or not! So another video coming soon on this subject!
your model is gorgeous
The wonderful Bec! She’s great to work with too, really easy going and fun!
I took some rolls of Berlin 400 to Hong Kong in 2019 and shot it on an LCA-120; it is really good for street photography; the grain is perfect for that
I wrote a reply to this but it seems to have disappeared... I think putting some Lomo Berlin into my Holga would actually be a great fit! I'll have to try that!
I recently developed a roll of Potsdam 100 in 510Pyro and it looked quite "normal". They are definitely different creatures.
It would be interesting to see how this Berlin film comes out in Pyro. Might do that test soon!
Well I've used a bunch of Lomography Potsdam 100 and have gotten really good photos with it, I haven't used the Berlin 400, but seeing some of your results I think I might just pass on it entirely. I'm so glad you kept the SLX Nic, its still one of my favourite 6.45/6x6 cameras, especially when I pair it up with some Rollei Retro 80/ or Ortho 25+.
I absolutely love that camera! Those three are my favorite cameras for sure. So glad you posted me toward the SLX, thank you!
@@the120ist have you tried the Potsdam 100 film yet? Sadly I'm one of those old timers that prefers the old 50's/60's Italian and Hollywood black and white film stocks that had almost no film grain, or zero grain. For me Ferrania P30 and Rollei Ortho 25+ come as close to that as I've been able to find.
nice episode, for me the photos that are taken digital are looking to clean-steril, the grain and imperfections on film i thing for my part are making nice pictures and giving it its individual touch and soul- alive
I agree, that some grain is definitely desirable. But how much grain?? That’s the big question!
The Berlin 400 is cinematography film from Orwo. I shot a lot more Potsdam 100. But it has not so dark base. Neither of two.
Well, if it’s not supposed to look like that, then I am totally baffled! So you’ve shot Berlin 400 recently? And it didn’t look like that?
maybe it's one of those films some like and some don't bex looks a lot of fun to work with.
If I got it right, then it's definitely going to be loved by some and hated by others. I researched as much as I could and found other people being surprised by the film base darkness... but very little about people being surprised by the grain. Which in turn surprised me... I don't know!
the berlin kino is probably orwo. The lady gray is probably foma.
i know cine film is supposed to be low contrast but now i'm fidgety about shooting the orwo and xx i picked up. hope they print well.
Yeah I was a bit surprised by the results. Some not displeasing, but some really, in my opinion, ruined by the hard grain. Interested to see how they look in the darkroom, not sure what to expect. I’ll post a video of it. 👍
How do the silver enlargements look?
Haven't done them yet, that's on the schedule for this week, vid coming soon!
Perhaps I missed this but were you shooting at box speed?
I don't think I said it, but yes I was. Second time around I literally followed the Lomography advice on their website to the letter, including using their dev times and recommended developers. All straight down the line, nothing adventurous, just trying to get the best results!
.Thanks. Another factor is distribution of grain. The close-ups look better overall because the grain is more evenly distributed. And it certainly does add something to the character of the portrait. That said, I still prefer the Tri-X. Which, in fact, your video inspired me to buy a few more rolls of.
@@bernardkelly235 I would usually opt for the Tri-X as well. But shooting these rolls have got me thinking about grain... and that perhaps always striving for as little grain as possible is not always the right thing to do. For me at least. Has given me plenty to think about!
Hi: I'm a relatively a new B&W photographer using a Olympic TLR; Konica(s) Autoflex T3, Auto S2, along with shooting mostly Ilford stock and Kentmere; developed in Ilfosol 3. You happen to be one of only photographer using Ilfosol 3. How do like it compared to other developers - very little - if any - comparisons with Ilfosol 3? Thanks.
try ID11 1+1 or Rodinal: famous developers
I have to confess that until recently I hadn’t used Ilfosol 3! I only got some because after the first test with the Lomo Berlin 400, I wanted to follow the instructions on the Lomo website to the letter, to make sure it wasn’t me screwing up, and they have times for Ilfosol on the website. If you take a look at the Berlin tech instructions on the Lomography website, they show you side by side comparisons of four developers. Ilfosol comes out so much more contrasty than HC110, which is what I use most often. Don’t know if that would be the case with other developers?? Some testing coming up I think!
@@the120ist contrast also depends on time, add +30% if you want to have more contrast if you shoot with a flat light, or stir more like every 30 secs. Search also about acutance
This looks heavily fogged, to the point I’ve shot ‘70s film that wasn’t as dark. Have you fixed an undeveloped piece of it to see if it clears vs this very dark base.
If it is fogging then it’s fogging like I’ve never seen before - completely uniform from end to end, running all the way to the edges and the very ends. It’s brand new film in a totally reliable camera, handled carefully. The second roll, as you can imagine, I double and triple checked everything. Have you shot Lomo Berlin? Do you have negatives that look different?
@@the120ist Berlin specifically, no, but I've shot a lot of expired film and that just looks expired and fogged to me. Hence wondering if an undeveloped clip test would clear or still have that incredibly dark base. Lomo isn't exactly known for their quality control and it wouldn't surprise me if this is just cooked in the box.
HP 5+ vs Kodak tri-x 400?
tmax 400
I actually prefer Tri-x! For me it has finer grain and I prefer the tones, but I don’t think I’ve ever taken the time to put the head to head. Maybe I’ll do that!
Maybe a thought... If you use developer with a high dilution and thus longer developing times, it *might* be a case of long development causing base fog? Because that as a base colour is too weird. Maybe try a more concentrated development (if you didn't do it quite concentrated already) with shorter development? Way back it was also a big problem with Kentmere papers, if you did long development times.
Good tip! Thank you. I tend to standardise most of my development - HC110 or equivalent and dilution B, which is 1+31, pretty middle of the road. I don't stand or semi stand except with 510 Pyro, and don't go in for the low dilution, long development, because I struggle with patience.... and I often have a lot of film to get through in a dev session.
I did some reading before I took the first films out, but as usual, when I messed it up I discovered I should have done more! The Lomo website actually tells you, if you read enough, that you'll get low contrast images from HC110, the lowest contrast of the developers they tested with it. Hence the Ilfosol 3 on the second attempt, and the base clarity definitely changes. Still super weird though!
Lesson learned? Will I read more before I head out on my next adventure? No. No I will not. Because where would be the fun in that?
The Berlin 400 shouldn’t look like that at all in my experience.
Oh really? I shot at 400, on different cameras, they were all working fine. I developed according to standard dev times first time, and according to instructions on Lomo’s own website the second time, and got the same results both times??
@@the120ist I checked my negatives and I must confess that I only shot 35 mm Berlin 400, not 120. But I shot a lot of Potsdam 100, another Lomography Kino film made by Orwo, both 35 mm and 120, and it’s not like this.