# Thoughts about SilverFast scanning software?



## cayenne (Oct 17, 2019)

Hi all,

Per my other thread...I'm shooting a little film, and I need to scan it.
Starting off with 120 B&W film with pinhole camera.

I've seen some video and ready a little that using Silverfast might be markedly superior to using the normal scanning software that comes with Epson (I have the V600).....

Does anyone have experience with SF? Is it worth it? Which version/features do you think are the best as that I see on the site that they have different levels and add-ons...

Silverfast Scanner Software

Thanks in advance for any info/suggestons!!

cayenne


----------



## cayenne (Oct 17, 2019)

Anyone? Anyone?

Bueller?


----------



## JuanMa (Oct 17, 2019)

I don’t know silverfast, I have tons of film which I usually scan with the Canon FS4000US and VueScan from Hamrick as scanning software. VuesCan is far better than the software coming with the FS4000 scanner. I know is an old scanner but the combination of the FS4000 and Vuescan gives very good results.


----------



## cayenne (Oct 17, 2019)

JuanMa said:


> I don’t know silverfast, I have tons of film which I usually scan with the Canon FS4000US and VueScan from Hamrick as scanning software. VuesCan is far better than the software coming with the FS4000 scanner. I know is an old scanner but the combination of the FS4000 and Vuescan gives very good results.




Thank you!!

I'll give that a look too and research it!!

What do you like about Vuescan over the native scanning software that came with your scanner?

C


----------



## JuanMa (Oct 17, 2019)

cayenne said:


> What do you like about Vuescan over the native scanning software that came with your scanner?
> 
> C



I get far more dynamic range and better colors with VueScan.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 17, 2019)

I used an early iteration of it years ago when I did some slide scanning and back then it definitely gave a superior scan to the software that came with the scanner. I believe mine was actually included with the scanner! My impressions of it back then were positive and it is vastly more mature now, a lot of the film presets did a good job of neutralizing the film base.

But my OS dropped support for my version license a long time ago and I lost heart in the scanning process. Nowadays I'd far rather rig up a macro lens on a camera and 'dup' it, like we used to with slides, than bother with the scanning process.


----------



## cayenne (Oct 17, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I used an early iteration of it years ago when I did some slide scanning and back then it definitely gave a superior scan to the software that came with the scanner. I believe mine was actually included with the scanner! My impressions of it back then were positive and it is vastly more mature now, a lot of the film presets did a good job of neutralizing the film base.
> 
> But my OS dropped support for my version license a long time ago and I lost heart in the scanning process. Nowadays I'd far rather rig up a macro lens on a camera and 'dup' it, like we used to with slides, than bother with the scanning process.




Thank you for the reply!!

Hmm...yeah, I read that SilverFast on their site, said the current iterations won't work with the new OSX Catalina upgrade, but also alluded to that the basic drivers for my scanner may not work if I were to upgrade to Catalina too.

My old MBP I use, is late 2011, still chugging along, but I think I'll end the OSX updates where it is for now to ensure things like my Photoshop CS6 and other Suite items continue to work, in addition to hardware like my scanner.

Hoping when the Mac Pros finally come out, I can get one of those for my media work and keep this one as needed for 32 bit stuff, etc.


Anyway, I digress. I think I'll go with the SilverFast....I'll give the Vue stuff a close look too before pulling the trigger on one of them.

Thank you everyone so much for the input so far!!!

Cayenne


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 17, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I used an early iteration of it years ago when I did some slide scanning and back then it definitely gave a superior scan to the software that came with the scanner. I believe mine was actually included with the scanner! My impressions of it back then were positive and it is vastly more mature now, a lot of the film presets did a good job of neutralizing the film base.
> 
> But my OS dropped support for my version license a long time ago and I lost heart in the scanning process. Nowadays I'd far rather rig up a macro lens on a camera and 'dup' it, like we used to with slides, than bother with the scanning process.


I also used an early version of it to scan Kodachrome slides. It worked quite well!


----------



## JohnC (Oct 17, 2019)

cayenne said:


> Hi all,
> 
> Per my other thread...I'm shooting a little film, and I need to scan it.
> Starting off with 120 B&W film with pinhole camera.
> ...




I've used it quite a bit with an Espon V700. I have also used VueScan. Both work, I think VueScan is easier to use in some respects, but I ended up staying with the SilverFast product although at the moment I don't recall why. It has been 3-4 years since I've done any scanning so I don't recall everything I should to give you a more complete answer.


----------



## cayenne (Oct 18, 2019)

JohnC said:


> I've used it quite a bit with an Espon V700. I have also used VueScan. Both work, I think VueScan is easier to use in some respects, but I ended up staying with the SilverFast product although at the moment I don't recall why. It has been 3-4 years since I've done any scanning so I don't recall everything I should to give you a more complete answer.



Thank you for the reply and input!!

Hmm, You know I think I saw they have a trial on the software, I might give that a whirl first.

I have my V850 trays coming in tomorrow, so I may play with this this weekend.

And the SF software isn't all that expensive, so if I experiment it won't break the bank or anything.

Ok, thank you all for all the info so far!!

C


----------



## JohnC (Oct 18, 2019)

cayenne said:


> Thank you for the reply and input!!
> 
> Hmm, You know I think I saw they have a trial on the software, I might give that a whirl first.
> 
> ...



I ended up ordering trays from from a place I think was called "Better Scan". I could find that out if needed. I thought there solution was much better for holding non-mounted transparencies and or negative film. The biggest issue I've had with scanners in general is getting the focus both correct and consistent, followed closely by making sure there is not dust on the transparency. 

At the time I had a pretty good work flow for getting the scans, file naming, and using exif tool to insert actual information like exposure settings, camera body, film used, etc. into the exif information. I'm sure I would have to go "re-learn" it if I went back to it today.

Here are a 35mm and 120 example scans from the V700 (or 750 can't remember right now) using Silverfast



Sunset over the Ohio by John Cothron, on Flickr



Sundown by John Cothron, on Flickr


----------



## cayenne (Oct 18, 2019)

JohnC said:


> I ended up ordering trays from from a place I think was called "Better Scan". I could find that out if needed. I thought there solution was much better for holding non-mounted transparencies and or negative film. The biggest issue I've had with scanners in general is getting the focus both correct and consistent, followed closely by making sure there is not dust on the transparency.
> 
> At the time I had a pretty good work flow for getting the scans, file naming, and using exif tool to insert actual information like exposure settings, camera body, film used, etc. into the exif information. I'm sure I would have to go "re-learn" it if I went back to it today.
> 
> ...


Thank you for the reply!!

ON another thread in this forum:
How About BetterScanning Products

I was asking about those.....I'd seen a video (linked to on that thread) where a comparison showed those to be best out of different tests for wet mounting....but that the regular V850 trays for dry scanning did a bit better....

Hmm.

Well, I'll give what I have coming a shot and see how it goes.

If I really get into this, I might spring for the BS stuff and give it a try...especially if I were to get into wet mounting....

Thank you for your reply and I like the image examples too...especially that B&W one o the water!!!

cayenne


----------



## cayenne (Jan 27, 2020)

Late follow up on this.

I got Silverfast, but it seems to be VERY flaky....crashes all the time, hangs...etc.

I've got the Mac Pro in, and of course, it won't work...even though Epson has put out drivers that will work with Catalina.

I'm installing the epson drivers for Catalina, and going to try the trial copy of VueScan and see if it works any better.

I really liked the vast options that SilverFast gave, but it just won't stay up and working long enough for me....I has connected the old V600 to the old MacBook Pro and used screensharing to use it remotely from the new computer...but SF just keeps being flaky.

Hoping VS will act better.

cayenne


----------



## stevelee (Jan 27, 2020)

I use VueScan with my Canon flatbed and my old Minolta (I think it is) slide and film scanner. It seems to support everything and is upgraded regularly. If you pay for the “pro” version, upgrades are supposedly free in perpetuity. There are very many options, such as multiple passes, bit depth choices, and raw output. I don’t recall it ever crashing. It should run fine under Catalina. I am holding off upgrading the OS until I file my taxes. I think my financial software will be OK, but I’m not taking a chance.

After I finish going through my photos from my fall trip, I hope to scan in more slides from my Eastern European trip from 2000. Besides my usual posting on my web site, I hope to do a photo book for the twentieth anniversary of the trip. The slides I have looked at recently appear to be in good shape. Photoshop ought to be able to take care of any slight fading, and I haven’t seen any fungus or the like.


----------



## malarcky (Jan 28, 2020)

stevelee said:


> I use VueScan with my Canon flatbed and my old Minolta (I think it is) slide and film scanner. It seems to support everything and is upgraded regularly. If you pay for the “pro” version, upgrades are supposedly free in perpetuity. There are very many options, such as multiple passes, bit depth choices, and raw output. I don’t recall it ever crashing. It should run fine under Catalina. I am holding off upgrading the OS until I file my taxes. I think my financial software will be OK, but I’m not taking a chance.
> 
> After I finish going through my photos from my fall trip, I hope to scan in more slides from my Eastern European trip from 2000. Besides my usual posting on my web site, I hope to do a photo book for the twentieth anniversary of the trip. The slides I have looked at recently appear to be in good shape. Photoshop ought to be able to take care of any slight fading, and I haven’t seen any fungus or the like.



Do you find the Silverfast software a bit intimidating? I find that there are so many variables that are just plain guessing game. I have a negative scanner that uses Silverfast. Is there a guide anywhere that you know of that would help someone who doesn't feel comfortable? Do you find VueScan easier/better to use?


----------



## stevelee (Jan 28, 2020)

malarcky said:


> Do you find the Silverfast software a bit intimidating? I find that there are so many variables that are just plain guessing game. I have a negative scanner that uses Silverfast. Is there a guide anywhere that you know of that would help someone who doesn't feel comfortable? Do you find VueScan easier/better to use?


I have not used Silverfast. I've been happy with VueScan for many years, so I haven't needed to try alternatives.


----------



## cayenne (Jan 28, 2020)

malarcky said:


> Do you find the Silverfast software a bit intimidating? I find that there are so many variables that are just plain guessing game. I have a negative scanner that uses Silverfast. Is there a guide anywhere that you know of that would help someone who doesn't feel comfortable? Do you find VueScan easier/better to use?





malarcky said:


> Do you find the Silverfast software a bit intimidating? I find that there are so many variables that are just plain guessing game. I have a negative scanner that uses Silverfast. Is there a guide anywhere that you know of that would help someone who doesn't feel comfortable? Do you find VueScan easier/better to use?



Well, if you're familiar with Photoshop, the most of the controls seem similar....but figuring out some things takes a bit of time trying, using and pushing buttons to see what they do, but it isn't rocket surgery.....

There are a few little things I found out on YouTube videos, etc...like with the Negafix...it doesn't work right unless your entire image is in the frame. If you try to scan a frame with some bare negative outside, the image fixing doesn't work properly.

The IR version of the scratch and dust doesn't work with B&W film...only color film. There is a non-IR scratch and dust fix that does work.

The NegaFix module in SF is amazing when you get the framing set right, you just tell it what type film you have and voila...it looks GREAT on inversion.

I REALLY want to like it...I love the large feature set...but it just is NOT stable in the least from what I've found.

I'm going to try out the VueScan stuff tomorrow....one thing I'm not going to like as much, is that instead of being able to use your mouse to directly move the framing lines, it appears you have to use a slider on the control panel to move them, seems a pain...

The description above mentioning multiple passes, I'm hoping that this is similar to the multiple exposure passes the SF does...neat trick.

I"ll try to report back on my efforts.

I found that Epson now has a 64 bit driver for my Epson V600...Im installing that on the Mac Pro, and will try VueScan trial to see how it and epson scan does.
An interesting tidbit, it appears the Epson 2 driver, etc....does not have ICE working, but if you download it, they will give you a version of SilverFast SE edition free if you enter in your Epson serial number.

I guess I"ll see if that works too....

cayenne


----------



## LDS (Jan 28, 2020)

cayenne said:


> The IR version of the scratch and dust doesn't work with B&W film...only color film.



Any IR technique can't work with films that include silver halide particles - their response is identical to visible and IR light, while colour dyes are usually transparent in IR, while dust/scratches are not, so they can be identified. There could be issues with Kodachrome films too, since their dyes have different IR light properties than dyes used in E-6 films.


----------



## ValleyofCarbon (Jan 28, 2020)

The issue that your having with Silverfast is the outdated TWAIN driver... the V600 was, I think was original to 2009 and very dated. If you're using a new or newish mac your probably running into driver issues. Try a TWAIN scan program to find the best match.

I have used VueScan, Silverfast AI, and Silverfast SE plus. On both Mac and Windows 10 64bit. The work flawlessly on both platforms with good drivers. Of the two competing software I prefer Silverfast for more involved work flows. If you're not interested in editing your flow heavily then VueScan is perfectly fine. I currently run the V800 with Silverfast AI and it is superb IMHO.

I develop, scan for less critical projects or image culling, and enlarge for print all at home. 4x5, 120, and 135...

I would avoid BetterScaning carriers as the anti-Newtonian glass is rather a hassle and the returns are minimal over the standard OEM film carriers. In addition the anti-Newtonian glass is treated with acid to produce the surface and will scratch if you look at it sideways. This is a very expensive replacement for such a easily reproducible incident. 

With the options you have for at home scanning the very best is wet-mounting. If a critical scan is needed I wet-scan, or if wanting the very best... drum scan outsourced. For 99% of my work wet scans provided the best/most economical scans you can get at home. Check aztek.com .

I've read a couple of your posts and it seems like your going to film for some of your work. I started this way, own tons of Canon gear but nowadays shoot mainly Leica and MF ( Rolleis, Mamiya and Fuji ) analog. Still shoot digital but prefer film. Crazy I know but even crazier I also shoot pinhole cameras too.It's all good for me.


----------



## cayenne (Jan 28, 2020)

ValleyofCarbon said:


> The issue that your having with Silverfast is the outdated TWAIN driver... the V600 was, I think was original to 2009 and very dated.




I've put in a ticket with SF and asking if they have the ability to let me use the Silver Fast AI studio I bought on my new computer, now that Epson has put out new drivers that will work on OS X Catalina....

I saw that on the Epson site, where you download the new Epson V600 drivers...they mention that since their ICE implementation is broken, they are giving a link to download a free copy of SilverFAst SE.....so, hoping if they can do that, they can also get my fairly recently purchased Silver Fast AI studio to work with the new driver and see if I can get some use out of the $$ I've spent with them.....

If what you say is true, maybe the new driver is better "TWAIN'ed". 

cayenne


----------



## ValleyofCarbon (Jan 28, 2020)

cayenne said:


> I've put in a ticket with SF and asking if they have the ability to let me use the Silver Fast AI studio I bought on my new computer, now that Epson has put out new drivers that will work on OS X Catalina....
> 
> I saw that on the Epson site, where you download the new Epson V600 drivers...they mention that since their ICE implementation is broken, they are giving a link to download a free copy of SilverFAst SE.....so, hoping if they can do that, they can also get my fairly recently purchased Silver Fast AI studio to work with the new driver and see if I can get some use out of the $$ I've spent with them.....
> 
> ...



I elaborated a little on my post...


----------



## cayenne (Jan 28, 2020)

ValleyofCarbon said:


> The issue that your having with Silverfast is the outdated TWAIN driver... the V600 was, I think was original to 2009 and very dated. If you're using a new or newish mac your probably running into driver issues. Try a TWAIN scan program to find the best match.
> 
> I have used VueScan, Silverfast AI, and Silverfast SE plus. On both Mac and Windows 10 64bit. The work flawlessly on both platforms with good drivers. Of the two competing software I prefer Silverfast for more involved work flows. If you're not interested in editing your flow heavily then VueScan is perfectly fine. I currently run the V800 with Silverfast AI and it is superb IMHO.
> 
> ...




Thank you!!

VERY informative!!!

Ok, I'm playing with VueScan free trial of the pro version. Yeah, if SF would work for me, I'd prefer that, I was starting to learn that workflow and if nothing else I prefer on SF being able to grab the frames with my mouse to adjust them over having to use the VueScan method.....

Alright, I'm seeing what can be on on the new Mac with OS X Catalina....I love my Macs, but so far, looks like the Catalina operating system was pushed out a little prematurely and broke a lot of stuff....grrr.


C


----------



## stevelee (Jan 29, 2020)

cayenne said:


> so far, looks like the Catalina operating system was pushed out a little prematurely and broke a lot of stuff....grrr.


If they waited until everything is updated to work under 64 bits, they would never have come out with the upgrade. They have been telling everybody this day was coming for at least two years, I think. Most things that won't run now, never will.


----------



## cayenne (Jan 29, 2020)

Ok quick update.

I talked with the SF folks and they said to just download the SF AI Studio version I had to my new computer, and it should work with the new Epson driver.

I did...and VOILA....it did too!!


I have just set up, batch scanned my first images on the new computer with the old V600, I did a strip of 3 6x6 B&Ws taken by the Hasslelblad over the holidays while trying to learn how to use it.

So far, SF works GREAT now, is responsive AND....so far, isn't crashing every few minutes. The scratch and dust filters are now much more responsive, and the scan times were much faster.

So, I'll change my story back and now like the Silver Fast scanning software.

Of course this is just a start, I"ll be going through a number of rolls of film I've shot, both color and B&W.....and will give this a good workout, but for now, I"m back to thumbs up for SilverFast.

Thank you,

cayenne


----------



## ValleyofCarbon (Jan 29, 2020)

Great to hear... While developing your work flow you should keep in mind the actual resolution that can be obtained with the V600. All manufactures make claims of 6400dpi but reality is often far from the claims. What you end up with are extremely bloated files if you scan at higher dpi's than actually capable. I have used filmscanner.info for quite sometime, its a German based website translated into English so there are some grammatical errors but overall I find the information to pretty spot on. For your V600 and optimal scan quality...

"In our testscan done with the USAF test chart with the V600, the vertical lines of the element 5.2. and the horizontal lines of the element 4.5 are barely recognizable. According to our resolution table, an effective resolution of 1560ppi results from that. This is less than a quarter of the resolution of 6400ppi declared by the producer. "






Detailed test report flat bed scanner Epson Perfection V600 Photo with integrated transparency unit for the scanning of slides, negatives and medium formats







www.filmscanner.info





And how do you like the Hassy? I use a 503cw but find it to be a bit finicky and not as robust as a Rolleiflex so I rarely use mine that much these days. They are ridiculously expensive to repair compared to other analog cameras. I wish there was someone out there that could do Hassy repairs as efficiently and cost effective as DAG could. Don just CLA'd a M4 bp and M6 in less than 2 days for a super great price. I've waited up to six months for Rollei and Hassy repairs and spent 10x more.


----------



## cayenne (Jan 29, 2020)

ValleyofCarbon said:


> Great to hear... While developing your work flow you should keep in mind the actual resolution that can be obtained with the V600. All manufactures make claims of 6400dpi but reality is often far from the claims. What you end up with are extremely bloated files if you scan at higher dpi's than actually capable. I have used filmscanner.info for quite sometime, its a German based website translated into English so there are some grammatical errors but overall I find the information to pretty spot on. For your V600 and optimal scan quality...
> 
> "In our testscan done with the USAF test chart with the V600, the vertical lines of the element 5.2. and the horizontal lines of the element 4.5 are barely recognizable. According to our resolution table, an effective resolution of 1560ppi results from that. This is less than a quarter of the resolution of 6400ppi declared by the producer. "
> 
> ...




Goodness, THANK YOU for that reply and great information!!

I do still have a LOT to learn about this whole process, but hey, I like to learn new things!!


I did just run into a little glitch on SF...I had changed out the images on the scanner and tried pre-scan, but SF wasn't bringing in the new images...it had 1 of the new ones but still showing 2 of the previous run....

I had to stop and start the app again and this time pre=scan shows the 3 new images. A little buggy still it appears.


ANYWAY...the Hassy...on man, I flat out LOVE it!! I"m still learning a lot on using a hand held light meter, trying to teach myself sunny 16 and variants...and the most difficult of all, with that view finder being backwards, when framing. I'm working on that so much I sometimes forget to also check to make sure my shot is level...hahaha.

OH well, but I'm learning and it IS getting easier and more natural.

I'm sure it is "new toy" bias, but I could swear, some of the images coming off the Hassy on 120 film, just almost seem "magical" to me, in terms of how things look, how they seem to "pop" off the image at you. Perhaps it is the difference in Medium Format DOF and looks, but I must same on some of my shots this early even, I'm just enamored with the images coming out, and it makes me want to shoot more and more!!

I must say too, that the square format is making it a fun new creative challenge too...its very different than the digital aspect ratio....but is fun to work with.

I also scored a Yashicha Mat 124G that was in mint shape at a garage sale for like I think $75....I've loaded a role of Tri-X 400 in it and am wanting to shoot it.

I'm hoping my 'day job' will let me be off this weekend to go shoot, as that weather is supposed to be really nice...sunny and in mid to upper 60's.

Anyway, this is all REALLY fun new ground for me....and I really appreciate yours and everyone else's feedback on all this....

cayenne


----------



## ValleyofCarbon (Jan 29, 2020)

It's the MF look for sure  Square is nice but I am drawn to 6x7. Are you deving at home? That's the next step... and its ridiculously easy. I do both color and BW as the cost of sending out these days is stupid compared to a C41 Tetenal kit or a bottle of HC110 that last for ever !!!!


----------



## cayenne (Jan 29, 2020)

ValleyofCarbon said:


> It's the MF look for sure  Square is nice but I am drawn to 6x7. Are you deving at home? That's the next step... and its ridiculously easy. I do both color and BW as the cost of sending out these days is stupid compared to a C41 Tetenal kit or a bottle of HC110 that last for ever !!!!



Well, that is the next step, home development. 

I figured I'd start with B&W...learn how to do that and what equipment to buy, from what I see there are spools you load in the dark with film and put into canisters that then seal and you can then bring into the light to pour chemicals in, etc....?

Anyway, trying to learn what I need to buy and then will start researching to see what and how, etc.

I did, however, buy a good sous vide water heater, in anticipation of using that to keep chemicals at their desired temperatures in a water bath...


If you have any suggestions or links to send a complete film developing noob to, please let me know....!!

Hmm...I might need to start a new thread on that when I get to that point.

I found a place where that develops film for about $7/roll..which isn't too bad and they have 1-2 day turn arounds.

So, that's not bad until I can get the equipment and knowhow on developing my own negatives.

C


----------



## ValleyofCarbon (Jan 29, 2020)

BW you can do for about 20 cents a roll... C41 about $2.25.

Go with JOBO tanks... much easier and no rusting of bearings used in other tanks. A little pricier but like tripods... buy quality once and you're set. And you prob don't need water heating unless you're doing more than 6 rolls at a time. I used to have a JOBO CPP3 with a lift... then I made a much simpler developer that runs very well. I made it with less than 100$ of material and after a year sold the CPP. If you're a hands-on/DIY type of guy I can outline the unit for you.

I can def help if you need. Been dev'ing at home for about 15 years. Shoot me an email if you'd like.


----------



## Sporgon (Feb 1, 2020)

cayenne said:


> Hi all,
> 
> Per my other thread...I'm shooting a little film, and I need to scan it.
> Starting off with 120 B&W film with pinhole camera.
> ...



Take a look at the Pentax 67, a great MF camera that in this modern digital age doesn't suffer from the lack of a Polaroid back. Not the 67 II which can't be repaired now, but the original 6x7 Mirror Up or the 67. Shoot it with Kodak Portra 160, Ektar, Ilford Pan F Plus, Fuji RDP III and you'll wonder why anyone bothers with digital MF. Of course you need a good optical scanner and this gets expensive. Drum scanning gets the most out of them.

I see you are looking at B&W Delta - personally I'd use the older B&W emulsions as I think they have more B&W character. The newer emulsions are more akin to digital - IMO. Ilford Pan F is very high resolution but tricky, FP4 and HP5 very versatile and user friendly films.

Incidentally I use Silverfast Studio on iMac Catalina and have no issues.

One other thing: don't dismiss 35mm film. With good lenses and technique you can get remarkably good results from films like Kodak Ektar and Ektachrome, Fuji RDP III. Resolution is around the 18 - 20 mp equivalent mark, but colour fidelity more like 30 mp.

Just one other point - if you shoot with positive film remember you'll need an incident light meter.

You also get to use some beautiful old cameras, when these things were like little jewels. I have a long time love affair with Pentax Spotmatics and the 55/1.8 Takumar lens. I have a collection of five at the moment. Because they all look the same my wife thinks I only have one.


----------



## ValleyofCarbon (Feb 2, 2020)

Sporgon said:


> Take a look at the Pentax 67, a great MF camera that in this modern digital age doesn't suffer from the lack of a Polaroid back. Not the 67 II which can't be repaired now, but the original 6x7 Mirror Up or the 67. Shoot it with Kodak Portra 160, Ektar, Ilford Pan F Plus, Fuji RDP III and you'll wonder why anyone bothers with digital MF. Of course you need a good optical scanner and this gets expensive. Drum scanning gets the most out of them.
> 
> I see you are looking at B&W Delta - personally I'd use the older B&W emulsions as I think they have more B&W character. The newer emulsions are more akin to digital - IMO. Ilford Pan F is very high resolution but tricky, FP4 and HP5 very versatile and user friendly films.
> 
> ...



The developer you use has more of affect on how "digital" looking BW Delta is. Most of the Ilford developers will make Delta look very digital. I think DDX is probably the best for this if that's what you're after. On the other hand Rodinal will accentuate the grain and give you great accutance. Personally I use HC110 at 1+47 and that gives a nice in between. 

FP4 is by far my favorite BW film in both 120 and 135... I love pushing it to N+2 or N+3 and developing in DDX. Something I find quite pleasing about that combo. It scans beautifully and on the enlarger produces spectacular prints.

Pentax 67 is a superb camera, I use mine quite a bit but prefer the Rollei 2.8 for its size, IQ and portability. If I could though... Mamiya RZ67 II blows the doors off both the Pentax and Rollei for IQ and lens selection, it's just a beast to carry. It only come out for serious portraiture of landscapes.


----------



## Sporgon (Feb 2, 2020)

ValleyofCarbon said:


> FP4 is by far my favorite BW film in both 120 and 135... I love pushing it to N+2 or N+3 and developing in DDX. Something I find quite pleasing about that combo. It scans beautifully and on the enlarger produces spectacular prints.



Interesting thought on the Delta, I'll maybe try that. Looks like we both agree that FR4 is the way to go - as long as you don't store it too long...........

A bit more advice for cayenne; don't store the film too long before you use it. I found a few boxes of unused FP4 up in my loft a few weeks ago. The expiry date was January 1993 !! So I stuck a roll in my 1997 EOS 1nHS and went to the beach to see if it would record anything after 27 years of being out of date. Hmmm, well, it's very grainy and lost some latitude and sensitivity, but unbelievably it still worked to a degree ! Attached is one of the shots.


----------



## Sporgon (Feb 2, 2020)

Also another (tongue in cheek) tip: don't leave it too long before you get the film developed. 

At the same time as I found the unused 35mm FP4 I also found three rolls of Kodak Vericolor III, 120, exposed but undeveloped. The film had been sat exposed for about 32 years. I thought I'll get them developed and see if any image is left on the film after all that time. Well believe it or not there is, and here's a sample. This would have been shot on my Pentax 6x7 probably around 1988 when it was quite new. 

Amazing to think that the little girl on the pony was probably around 14 years of age then; now she'll be about 46. At least I hope she has made it to that age OK.


----------



## ValleyofCarbon (Feb 4, 2020)

Sporgon said:


> Also another (tongue in cheek) tip: don't leave it too long before you get the film developed.
> 
> At the same time as I found the unused 35mm FP4 I also found three rolls of Kodak Vericolor III, 120, exposed but undeveloped. The film had been sat exposed for about 32 years. I thought I'll get them developed and see if any image is left on the film after all that time. Well believe it or not there is, and here's a sample. This would have been shot on my Pentax 6x7 probably around 1988 when it was quite new.
> 
> Amazing to think that the little girl on the pony was probably around 14 years of age then; now she'll be about 46. At least I hope she has made it to that age OK.



Nice didn't fair too bad. Over the last few years while out shooting I inevitably run into people that ask about film. A few have ended up sending me rolls that are ancient... pre-WWII for a few and every one has developed. More BW and a few C41. Pretty tough stuff.


----------



## Sporgon (Feb 4, 2020)

ValleyofCarbon said:


> Nice didn't fair too bad. Over the last few years while out shooting I inevitably run into people that ask about film. A few have ended up sending me rolls that are ancient... pre-WWII for a few and every one has developed. More BW and a few C41. Pretty tough stuff.



I have a roll of 120 Verichrome exposed but undeveloped. I think this must have been shot by my Grandfather as he used 120 and the film was produced from around 1931 to 1956. Any recommendations on how you'd process it ? It's a B&W negative film (I think).


----------



## ValleyofCarbon (Feb 4, 2020)

Sporgon said:


> I have a roll of 120 Verichrome exposed but undeveloped. I think this must have been shot by my Grandfather as he used 120 and the film was produced from around 1931 to 1956. Any recommendations on how you'd process it ? It's a B&W negative film (I think).



I'd use Rodinal in stand and dev at N+3 or HC110 in normal agitation at N+3... both would/should work well. Verichrome is a pretty great film known for it's long shelf life.


----------



## Sporgon (Feb 4, 2020)

ValleyofCarbon said:


> I'd use Rodinal in stand and dev at N+3 or HC110 in normal agitation at N+3... both would/should work well. Verichrome is a pretty great film known for it's long shelf life.


Thanks, I'll let you know if anything develops......


----------

