Least favorite film

jgredline · 06-17-2009, 07:55 PM

Hi folks. Of all the films you have used, which ones would be your least favorite and why?

jgredline · 06-17-2009, 07:58 PM

My least favorite film so far is the agfa vista 400 std film... to grainy and it is grain that looks more like noise.. I thought I had a bad batch of film, but even in samples I have seen, it is not good. I do hear that some agfa films are very nice, but I have not used others.

*CSoars* · 06-17-2009, 09:36 PM

Dunno, I'm not a huge fan of the Fuji C41, esp. Xtra 400/800 and even the 160C stuff. I really like the colour rendition and grain of Kodak's Portra family instead.

Like Kodak's TMax 100, but on the traditional side, for some reason Ilford's HP5+ gels better for me than Tri-X.

Venturi · 06-17-2009, 09:50 PM

This may not be a fair call as I've only shot a couple rolls of it but of all the B&W I have gone through this year Fuji 100 Acros is my least favorite. Which I found a little puzzling because I absolutely love Neopan 400.

The first roll I developed in HC110 dilution H and the frames all just felt flat and a bit grainy in a not so good way. So the 2nd roll I developed in TMAX 1:7 - not much improvement. Plus-X and TMax 100 both gave me much better results.

But to be fair I'm finding I'm not overly fond of 100ISO B&W films outside of "the studio" - which very well may say more about me than it does the film.

artobest · 06-18-2009, 03:42 AM

It depends on what I'm shooting. I like Astia for portraits, but it's dull for anything else (strangely I do like Sensia though

). I can't stand Kodak consumer E6 films, especially compared to their Fuji equivalents. To my eyes there's just no pop or zing.

Like many here, I'll use Ilford XP2 in a pinch, but when I blow it up I usually wish I hadn't. It's coarse, mottled structure doesn't really do justice to the image. Haven't tried the Kodak version ...

Cosmo · 06-18-2009, 06:37 AM

I hate the whole fuji superia range. Ick.

I have a love/hate relationship with HP5+, while it's useful for low light street due to speed, I often find it too high contrast in strong light. And the grain....sometime i love it, sometimes I hate it. I wish Ilford made a 400 speed FP4+.

And Delta 3200, so unbelievably, unusably grainy. Can barely use it half the time. Though the grain can sometimes look good, this is also a sort of love/hate thing.

lithos · 06-18-2009, 10:16 PM

Cosmo...HP5 is the 400-speed FP4.

I'd say HP5 - too blue-sensitive. Shadow detail is utter obliterated if pushed a mere stop.

TMAX - one of the biggest examples of why you should never, ever, ever let marketing drive your product design. Mushy, extremely flat tones, again flattish curve that's a bit too blue-sensitive. Yet it costs more than Tri-X. Eh, not that I'm complaining. Muddier than the Yarra.

I'm not really a fan of Fuji colour films, as the 4th colour layer (the green one) can make everything look like it was shot under Fluorescent lighting. Kodak's a bit warmer (Portra rocks, Csoars!) But still, they're pretty darn good.

Artobest, Kodak's consumer E6 films are made from Chinese emulsions, if not stock. Do you know who told me that? A certified Kodak Pro-Lab owner. He was under obligation to sell the stuff, not to like it. Said Fuji's Sensias were a better bet.

eSFotos · 06-19-2009, 07:05 AM

I clean swept AGFA Vista 100 from a supermarket about a year ago. A total of 20 rolls.
Awful colours and un-natural grainy. Absolute rubbish.

*ChrisPlatt* · 06-19-2009, 05:18 PM

I liked the old, made in Germany Walgreens Studio 35 100 and 400. Was it Agfa Vista? Dunno.
Agfa went bust several years ago. The new Studio 35 film is made in Japan; it must be Fuji.

Out of town last year my only option for film was Walmart, so I tried Fuji Superia 100 and 400.
Superior? No, definitely inferior. "Inferia"would be a more apt name. Are you listening, Fuji?

Chris

drewdlephone · 06-19-2009, 09:57 PM

I too dislike the Fuji Superia line. Every roll I've shot I've gotten very stark, contrasty shots with a lot of tendency to go into the blue and purple overtones, and when there is a warm red/orange/yellow to be found, it's rendered in these freaky neon hues. Total trash with the ONLY exception of the combination of the Vancouver Aquarium and Xtra 800. I got some nice underwater shots out of those rolls.

Also not a big fan of Ilford XP2. I'll live with it, but Kodak's BW400 blows it's pants off in terms of tonal range and contrast (and the lessening thereof).

*Wheatfield* · 06-19-2009, 10:56 PM

I hate that horrible Chinese film called Fuda thst comes in reused single use cameras.

*chalion* · 06-20-2009, 03:40 PM

I also dislike the Fuji Superia film. Even the Kodak Gold beats the pants off of it.

*Blue* · 06-20-2009, 04:14 PM

Some of the tungsten films I always seemed to have problems with.

Russell W. Barnes · 06-20-2009, 04:17 PM

Originally Posted by jgredline

Hi folks. Of all the films you have used, which ones would be your least favorite and why?

Orwochrome, although it has a sort of quaint 'postery' feel to it. Agfachrome CT100 is a close second. To be fair, I haven't shot on Agfa for thirty-odd years so it may have improved.

Attached slide shot on Orwochrome with Pentax MX and 50mm f1.7 lens, scanned with Canon Ixus 750 through reversed Pentax-M 50mm lens over lightbox.

jgredline · 06-20-2009, 05:07 PM

Wow, this has been a most interesting read. Mostly I am surprised at how one person will like what another dislikes and so forth.