If I'm going to shoot color 4x5, is negative film even worth it, or should I just go whole hog and shoot Ektachrome of one of the Fujichromes? I have processed 35mm and 120 films in C41, but never 4x5 in either slide or neg film.
So, when taking into account the learning curve of E6 development, is it still worth it to shoot slide film? Does Neg. film suck, or is halfway decent at a big enough cut?
*edit* Also take into account base color balancing issues when scanning negative film
I disagree with your supposition. I think it's negative films that are superior to tranny films, not the other way around.
The only thing you loose when when shooting negative films is the instant gratification of the film on the light table. If that's what drives you then tranny films are where you should be.
The big gain with negative films is the ability to record considerably more subject brightness range (SBR). In my neck of the woods that means I can work in any lighting conditions. I don't have to wait for the golden hours or for heavy overcast.
Negative films are excellent for scanning. I drum scan LF negative films, color and B&W, all the time. I actually prefer negative films for scanning. It's a little more work (you do have to know a bit more about what you are trying to do) but the results I get are just outstanding. Enough so that I haven't used any tranny films at all in the last six or seven years for my personal work. All I shoot these days are 5x4 160PortraNC, 400PortraNC, and 400Tmax. It's a good time to be an LF photographer!
There are of course scanners and software that have a hard time with negative films. Part of the problem is the variable density and color of the orange contrast mask. Part of the problem is having to invert the colors. If you are stuck with such a scanner, then you'll probably want to stick with tranny film.
