 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
There are many types of 35mm pro film I have never played with, and am curious about the benefits.I have never been wild about Fuji's color saturation on their consumer film- is the pro better? Which type?
Which of the many Kodak types is the best for GP- for portraits- landscape, etc.
Thanks for any assistance!
Tim
Follow Ups:
I have been shooting a variety of Fuji pro film. IMO it is definitely worth the extra expense over consumer film. Most important is that you know different film characteristics and strengths/weaknesses so you can pick the one(s) that best suit your tastes and needs at a particular time.Also, while I have a *slight* preference for Fuji over Kodak (print film), I agree with the last post to get Fuji film printed on a Fuji lab and paper (look for the Frontier labs), and Kodak printed on Kodak paper.
A quick run-down on some of my favorites:
Fuji Reala 100 - Very fine grain, saturated colours that are good for both landscape photography AND portraiture. Not many films manage both at once.
Fuji NPH 400 - Low contrast, slightly muted colours. Good for portraits and street/general photography, if you like that sort of 'mood'. Bumping up the exposure a little (set at ISO 320) adds a more snap to colours.
Fuji NPZ 800 - Vibrant colours, very acceptable grain for ISO 800. Great for hand-held ambient light photography when ISO 400 just doesn't cut it.
I'll stick to substance here. I use Kodak Max 400 for travel photography as I like the latitude and the vivid colors, high contrast and saturation I get. Pictures with "pop" that look like postcards. For more subtlety in colors and contrast I use Fuji Superia 400. For portraits or people pictures I would use Portra in the normal color version. The vivid color version of Portra is too snappy. Underwater I use Fuji 800 Pro as it handles the excess blue better.I have found that my preferences have shifted over the years as the film formulations have evolved, and to some extent as I changed gear. I just recently got a Nikon N80, and have no depth of experience with it and the new AF lenses with different films. The usage listed above was with my FE-2 with some older Series 1, Tamron SP, Nikkor AI, and Sigma lenses. It's really a try it and see issue, so you'll have to get out and just shoot a bunch of shots under similar conditions and see what you like. I use a McBeth-Gretag color chart to evaluate lens coloration. If you do that, you need to ask the lab to print with the compensation turned off, as the computer in the processor will "fix" things for you and you won't know where you are.
I have found that I prefer Fuji printed on Fuji paper and Kodak printed on Kodak paper, so I use different labs depending on what I'm using. A lot of smaller labs may not have a channel set up for the less common pro films and that will really skew your results. You need to ask about their set up before you drop off your film.
I shoot a lot of Kodak Portra because the color matches across the entire range of film speeds (160, 400, 800) and film sizes. The film is fairly low contrast, and you can give it more exposure for better shadow detail while still holding highlight detail. As far a color rendition, it looks neutral to me. I've been getting free Fuji film samples from my local lab because they want me to change to Fuji negative film - so far, even the free film hasn't convinced me to change. I like being able to shoot 800 speed film that matches the 160 speed for color.
*** I have never been wild about Fuji's color saturation on their consumer film- is the pro better? Which type?Actually the before Kodak came us with thier "Portra" film the Fuji was the only one C-41 film witch did more of less acceptable job and hold density at the marked ASA. (The former Kodak pro film had to be "fried"). Now practically everyone switch to "Portra" which is more "flexible" and has less gipsy "saturation" then Fuji.
Rgs,
Romy the Cat
To the person asking questions, there is a thread below with some information, before it was hijacked by deliberate misinformation and defamatory behaviors.Romy's response here isn't so awful, though. I'd tend to use different film for landscape vs. people, MOST of the time, though.
For casual purposes, Kodak Supra isn't bad, but it's not something I'd use when being "serious".
JJ - Philalethist and Annoyer of Bullies
The color films permit much less "forced developing" then B/W. There are many reasons why (architecture and R&E of color film, filtration of pH and concentration of the developing ingredients by the topmost levels, misbalance of reaching density and contrast by the different film levels, some dynamic process of the film development and many-many others) mostly people use the color film "as is". Whatever conversation we had was about b/w film. Yes, if a person knows what he is doing (obviously it is not you) then the majorities of b/w film's characteristic are irrelevant and could be used in the way as a person intend to.If you so desperately wiling to refer everyone to the thread you are reefing then do not forget to mention that you, as a person who moderate this forum, deleted from that thread two posts that clearly indicated the you are a complete moron.
So, repost the deleted posts or fuck off.
Romy The Cat
Why does anyone bother to talk to you? The thread you so embarrassed yourself in is: 1) Still there, minus pure abuse. 2) About Color and B&W, not just about B&W.Your lecture about C41, at least, is pretty much spot on. E6 is somewhat more tolerant, though, but still hardly as flexible as Pan F+ or Tri-X. To be honest, I don't like the Tmax films much, and I have no idea how they can be manipulated. If you'd like to be CONstructive, and have something USEFUL to offer for once, tell us about how Tmax can be manipulated. I suppose I have to be curious, I assume that some day everything else will dry up :(
In any case: Anyone who cares can go read the threads, and see the true perfidy of your accusations.
JJ - Philalethist and Annoyer of Bullies
Who care what you think, do, or what you are interested. Over the course of the last 3 you have indicated who you are and it is perfectly fine to erase you as a voluble or interesting collaborator. Go to college and get 27th PhD of blow-jobbing and then go to suck the dick of AA Board.How much time I have to rapid: do not read, do not reply and totally ignore my posts because I have a formed opinion about your total worthlessness and emptiness.
Fuck off,
Romy the Cat
Pathetic.
JJ - Philalethist and Annoyer of Bullies
Here I thought Outside Asylum was BAD !!!!
It would really be great if "Shutterbug Strasse" got more posts. We really don't need nastiness here. I had to post in the "Outside Asylum" concerning film I used in a Leica R6.2 camera I bought. I was really pleased with all the "constructive" advise I got there. One professional photographer even referred me to other very informative websites. This is what the Shutterbug Strasse should be doing. Please do your fighting somewhere else, like, take it "Outside".
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
