Boris Liberman asked:
> My idea was to take the following kit: ZX-L, FA 50, F 85 soft, and AF
> 220 flash. I wanted to load it with some very fast film so that
> preferrably flash would not have to be used. And I wanted to do purely
> B&W shooting.
>
> In my local store I can buy either Kodak TMAX 3200 (proper B/W film)
> or Fuji Press Pro 1600 (color C-41). I used Fuji to shoot basketball
> and was satisfied. However it is color.
>
> So, finally here is the question <g>: what is better: Kodak TMAX 3200
> or Fuji Press Pro 1600 scanned and turned b/w digitally?
I shoot Fuji 1600, but even with the improvements (when they
replaced Super HQ with Press 1600), I've been gradually
drifting away from it, using Press 800 whenever I can get
away with one stop slower. I haven't tried scanning it and
re-rendering it as black-and-white, so I can't do a direct
comparison for you. But I can say that, at least the way the
lab I use processes and prints it, I really love TMZ (TMax p3200)
and Ilford Delta 3200. Thinking about the way a Press 1600
print looks and trying to imagine removing the colour, I have
trouble believing I'd like that better than a good TMZ print.
But one caveat: I _despise_ the look of TMZ when used with
flash. Since your intent is to use it to avoid needing flash,
that probably won't be an issue.
I don't know where the wedding will be, but I know many churches
are dim enough to want a film speed of 3200 or faster anyhow,
at least with longish lenses. For 4x6 prints you'll get away
with pushing TMZ to 12500 ASA if you have to, as long as you're
careful to expose it properly at that speed. (For larger prints
it's a matter of taste and composition. The grain will be pretty
significant at 12500 in an 8x10. But I've quite been happy with
8x10 prints from TMZ at 6400 or 3200.)
I don't know how difficult it is to get such good results from
TMZ -- my lab said they use different developers for different
speeds, and prefer to be able to take the lighting into account
if the customer can tell them that, but TV developed some of my
TMZ and he didn't make it sound like it was all that difficult
with the rolls I gave him (but ask in case I've misremembered).
When it comes to printing, you'll notice -- one lab I use does
fine work with C41 and Tri-X, and I'd be happy with the prints
they make off my TMZ negs if I didn't know that the other lab I
use works _magic_ with the TMZ (and HIE) that I hand them.
Oooh, thinking of HIE ... if there'll be outdoor (daytime) shots
between the ceremony and the reception, plan to shoot some HIE!
Even if you go so far as to shoot over the hired pro's shoulder,
you won't be merely duplicating his effort, 'cause you'll get a
completely different (and nifty) look.
When I've shot weddings as a guest, folks have appreciated my
catching the kinds of shots the hired photographer missed ...
and most of those were missed because the hired photographer
was getting shots on the Absolutely Must Get list at the time
(only once was it because the hired fellow made poor choices).
Since they've already got someone to get the Must Get shots,
look for the "it would be a shame to leave this out even though
another shot is more important" ones.
-- Glenn
