LOMOGRAPHY EARL GREY 100 BLACK AND WHITE FILM REVIEW IN PENTAX 645 MEDIUM FORMAT CAMERA

I ran a roll of Lomography's Earl Grey 100 film through my medium format Pentax 645 camera with the 45-85mm f/4.5 lens on a bright, sunny late-afternoon. The results from this film were deep blacks, bright whites and nice, soft shades of grey.

I found the Earl Grey 100 to deliver a very nice gritty cinematic look, but I got quite a bit of grain that seemed a bit much for 100 speed film, however, that could be an issue with over-development on my end. Nonetheless, extra grain doesn't bother me personally, but I can't give an accurate account of the grain factor of this roll as a definite.

PRICE

One of the attractive features of the Lomography Earl Grey 100 film is the budget price of less than $22 US for a pack of three 35mm or 120 rolls. This puts it in the same neighborhood as Kentmere, Fomapan and other low cost black and white films.

DEEP BLACKS

Let's talk about those deep blacks I mentioned above, which are just superb. My driveby shooting routine worked fairly well with this film. I found a bit of a rundown trailer park, and a few of older neighborhood areas to get some shots.

I finished the roll with one of my favorite shots of the day, a small corner bar with a very colorful soda theme on the wall. Again, this was black and white film, so I didn't have great expectations of the scene looking as good as it could have with color film. And while that assumption may still be correct, I was incredibly pleased with the solid, crisp image I walked away with from this location.

SHARPNESS

While most sharpness can be traced to the lens you're using, film does have the ability to make your negatives even sharper. I found the medium tones to be incredibly sharp with Earl Grey, but the darks tend to be filled in dramatically, especially if slightly under-exposed. It's a difficult look to explain, but works great for gritty, dingy photo subjects and locations.

Some photographers will tell you Earl Grey 100 is better for portraits than it is for the street. I haven't used it exclusively for either, but find it very moody, and likely not something I'd use for traditional street photography. If you're looking for moody, yet sharp portraits, I could see it working. As always just depends on the user's taste and what they like from film.

DEVELOPING

I developed this roll of Earl Grey 100 in the same solution I use for all my black and white work, the Cinestill DF96 Monobath, which does not use fixer or stop bath, just the developer, rinse, and you're done.

Like most Lomography films, the Earl Grey (much like the Lady Grey) is very flimsy and has a dramatic curl to it that can be annoying when using a scanning bed. If you're using the DSLR-scan method, it's not as bad because you are usually able to isolate and have a more firm hold on the film in that setup.

However, on a flatbed scanner like I use (Epson V600 with Epson Scan software) this 120 film was somewhat difficult to keep from bowing in the middle while in the carrier. But after setting it under some heavy books for a day or so, it was flat enough to comply with my scanning needs, and as noted above, produced some very nice results.

GREEN DYE

With both the Lady Grey and Earl Grey films, there is a green coating or coloring that will turn your developer green. This isn't a problem, unless you're reusing your developer as I do with the DF96.

In the same jug, I developed both a roll of Lady Grey and Earl Grey films. After the second roll (Earl Grey) my developer died. And by 'died' I mean the next roll came out undeveloped and clear. Tracing back the process, I came to the conclusion that my developer was dead, and since it was only about halfway through it's expected life, it's the only conclusion I can come up with.

I've read a lot of reviews online that say the green dye shouldn't be an issue with reusable developers, but I'm not willing to take that risk again. So for that reason alone this will likely be my final experimental roll of either Lady Grey or Earl Grey films.

CONCLUSION

As stated above, I won't be going back to the Earl Grey film for two main reasons:

1) the green dye is unsettling to me and while I don't know for sure it was the reason my developer died a quick and sudden death, I'm going to attribute it to that, and call it day.

2) The above fact, plus the film itself being physically thin and therefore difficult to get on the developing roll, is enough for me to deny trying more rolls of Lady Grey or Earl Grey.

The final images themselves appear to be very nice, and I like the dark, gritty blacks, but I can get this same look from other less fragile films without the nasty green dye, or weak negatives.