Using B/W film vs. scanning and turning color scans to B/W?

[brainmonster]

I'm about to buy some new film as I'm running out, and I'm kind of curious about trying B/W. However, in digital, it's usually best to take pictures in color then turn into B/W in postprocessing.

What about film? I've noticed Ilford HP5 is more expensive then Ultramax. I could just take the pictures with the cheaper ultramax and then turn into b/w in postprocessing, but is there any advantage to shooting with the more expensive Ilford film?

I plan on just doing scans basically, I won't develop my own film, but will scan myself.

Thanks!

 

[Bill Burk]

With color negative film the grains of silver are replaced with clouds of dye.

There isn’t a disadvantage to the pictures you will get either way. You can make beautiful pictures either way.

But a lot of people who shoot black and white film are interested in the grain.

And if you want grain, then shooting color film isn’t going to give you the same look.

 

[brainmonster]

HP5 is “professional grade” is that right? What does that mean? Maybe I’ll get better results with the Ilford?

With color negative film the grains of silver are replaced with clouds of dye.

There isn’t a disadvantage to the pictures you will get either way. You can make beautiful pictures either way.

But a lot of people who shoot black and white film are interested in the grain.

And if you want grain, then shooting color film isn’t going to give you the same look.

 

[MattKing]

If you wish to potentially have the option of darkroom printing your negatives at some time in the future, colour film will, of course, be the only way to get to colour prints.
However, darkroom printing of colour negatives on to black and white photographic paper is much more difficult than darkroom printing of black and white negatives on to black and white photographic paper.

 

[koraks]

Additionally, color film does not respond very well to contrast manipulation through variation of exposure and development. And given the same film speed, the granularity of B&W film is generally a bit lower than with color, although that also depends on film stock and processing.

 

[John51]

Try a roll of Ilford XP2. It's a C41 film and will be more of an apples to apples comparison with your colour negs.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

With color negative film the grains of silver are replaced with clouds of dye.

There isn’t a disadvantage to the pictures you will get either way. You can make beautiful pictures either way.

But a lot of people who shoot black and white film are interested in the grain.

And if you want grain, then shooting color film isn’t going to give you the same look.

+1

 

[koraks]

Try a roll of Ilford XP2. It's a C41 film and will be more of an apples to apples comparison with your colour negs.

What would the benefit be of this approach for OP? As I understand, he wants to enjoy the low cost of C41 film which he apparently can get cheaply.

@OP: if you're concerned about costs, by far the cheapest way of doing B&W photography is get some cheap-ish B&W film (think e.g. Fomapan, but there are some other low-cost brands/rebranded stocks) and develop it yourself. It'll be cheaper than consumer-grade cheap C41 film processed by a lab.

 

[foc]

Even with the low cost of (for example) Fomapan there will be the cost of B&W film developing which is not as cheap as C41, since the OP says they don't do their own processing.

The OP has been given great advice above by everyone. Here is my 2 cents worth.

I think the OP should try the following.
Shoot a roll of colour film (eg Ultramax/Superia Xtra400), get it developed and scan it and convert to B&W.
Shoot a roll of Ilford XP2, get it developed and scan it and (if necessary) convert it to B&W.
Shoot a roll of Ilford HP5, and do the same as above.

Then look at all your images and see if you can tell any difference or similarities between them all? Do you like the look of any one of them more than the other?
IMO it is really a matter of personal taste. So go with what you like.

 

[removed account4]

hi brainmonster, before you buy the b/w film .. do you have a lab that will process it for you ? some labs that do color processing will NOT develop black and white film, it is a completely different process to get the film to convert to negatives .. that is, with the exception of the xp2super already mentioned. color film is either c4t1 ( color print film[including xp2]) or e6 which are slides/positives. both of those types of color films ( c41+e6 ) are their own process too, and a lot of regular labs won't process e6 film either so make sure if you buy color film to shoot you get c41 color NEGATIVE film. with regards to converting it to b/w post processing, you can do that no worries and make beautiful images ( also mentioned ). in the end often times its the image that's important, and no necessarily how you got there. if you are getting your feet wet, i'd just grab some cheep consumer c41 color film and convert it like you planned. if you have a friend or lab that will develop your b/w for you and you want to try it to see the difference in "image quality" definately check it out ... there are differences in the tonality and how the image looks that might be considered subtle but they are there.
have fun !
john

 

[tezzasmall]

HP5 is “professional grade” is that right? What does that mean? Maybe I’ll get better results with the Ilford?

Just to point out to the OP, that HP5+ IS made by Ilford! And yes it's a good film and yes, it is used by professionals as well as others.

Terry S

 

[brainmonster]

I just ordered some rolls of HP5 and ultramax. XP2 was too expensive so I didn't order it ($8.00 vs $5.00 for HP5 at BH photo)

I have a lab that will develop HP5, should be fine.

Looking forward to trying them both out!

hi brainmonster, before you buy the b/w film .. do you have a lab that will process it for you ? some labs that do color processing will NOT develop black and white film,
john