Do you prefer Fp-100c or Fp-100c Silk, and why?

[Ryan Rivers]

I've never shot either of these before, but I ordered some tonight.
Do you guys have a preference of one over the other?

 

[mweintraub]

Whatever is available and cheap. RIP FP-100

 

[EdSawyer]

I like the regular version, not the silk. Still, take what you can get, really. B&H still has FP100c. RIP indeed (and screw fuji, for discontinuing it.)

 

[Noemi]

I've been shooting with both, you can still find "reasonably" priced film in Italy (about $16 box). I prefer the silk, with has a very soft sheen on it, vs the glossy look of the regular film. It seems to render colors better, is dry a bit faster but mostly I just prefer the look of the more subtle colors it provides. Definitely recommend trying both.

 

[guyjr]

I've shot with both, and definitely prefer the non-silk. The silk looks too much like 4-color print process applied to instant film - very grainy, dotty surface, and doesn't scan well at all. It is an interesting look if that's what you're going for, so from an artistic point of view may be worth trying both side-by-side.

RIP FP -

 

[Agulliver]

Silk....mostly because it's a lot cheaper. I think it also reminds me of matte prints from regular C41 film that one used to get 30 years ago.

 

[Noemi]

Yes, that's a good description
How much cheaper do you find the silk vs the gloss?

 

[Agulliver]

I haven't looked for a couple of months but the price difference between the cheapest "in date" supplier of silk and the cheapest "in date" supplier of gloss was generally 25% here in the UK.

 

[holggger]

Yes, that's a good description
How much cheaper do you find the silk vs the gloss?

At the moment it is 19 Euros for the silk one (just got myself two packs) and 35-40 Euros for the glossy one.

 

[richyd]

I bought a pack of Silk recently and it immediately reminded me prints you used to get in the 70s, horrible dimpled surface. I used it for transfers anyway so didn't matter. The gloss is really super.