Fuji Pro Films

[rossawilson1]

Hi, I was reading that Fuji pro films are optimised for scanning and one light printing.. does that mean they're not so good for colour darkroom work?

Thanks

 

[chriscrawfordphoto]

Are you asking about slide or negative films? I haven't printed any fuji color films, but I know that Kodak Portra films, which they claim are optimized for scanning, are a lot easier to print traditionally than they are to scan. I don't know exactly what they're doing to make them 'optimized' for scanning, but the orange mask really gets in the way of that, yet it is needed for traditional printing. In other words, I think you'll be ok doing darkroom prints of any color neg film. If you ever do want to scan so you can do retouching or other photoshop work, I'd stick to slide film.

 

[rossawilson1]

Thanks Chris.. I already do colour darkroom but I've only used Superia. Probably a dumb question in the first place but I didn't know if there were films that are better for optical printing or if I was paying extra for something I'd never see with Pro film. I've ordered a few rolls now so I guess I'll find out.

 

[Anon Ymous]

... I didn't know if there were films that are better for optical printing or if I was paying extra for something I'd never see with Pro film...

Hi Ross;

Part of the extra money you pay for pro film is because these have stricter tolerance about color reproduction. When a film is made it doesn't have the same response throughout it's useful life. AFAIK pro film requires some ripening by the manufacturer before it's shipped to retailers. The "use by" date also reflects the narrow timespan in which it will have these characteristics. So, if you're a demanding professional, all these might make sense. If not, a pro film might be an overkill. It's up to you to choose.

 

[rossawilson1]

That's interesting Anon, thank you. I think if I'm going to the length of printing them in a colour dark room it will probably be worth the extra expense.

 

[2F/2F]

Are you asking about slide or negative films? I haven't printed any fuji color films, but I know that Kodak Portra films, which they claim are optimized for scanning, are a lot easier to print traditionally than they are to scan. I don't know exactly what they're doing to make them 'optimized' for scanning, but the orange mask really gets in the way of that, yet it is needed for traditional printing. In other words, I think you'll be ok doing darkroom prints of any color neg film. If you ever do want to scan so you can do retouching or other photoshop work, I'd stick to slide film.

Yes; It would be nice if you could get a version with a clear base in case you want to shoot to scan. It would be especially nice in the larger formats, since I don't usually scan 35mm.

However, you can do a lot with pushing and pulling of E-6 films, and then scan. The problem is that this is expensive if you go to a lab, and a PITA if you do it at home. Oh yeah, and you also have to pay attention and take more notes!

 

[papo]

I have printed Fuji 160C, 160S and NPH 400 and I like them. The only unusual thing it that they have very dense orange base and require very little filtering, with NPH 400 I got as far as 2M, 5Y or so and I was getting afraid that even 0 wouldn't suffice. But eventually it was good.

 

[RoBBo]

I'd say if you're worried about color reproduction carry a color match card and use an extra frame for it.
Slide film just isn't worth it for scanning. I have enough problems with it's limited dynamic range if I'm just shooting it for the slide, but if you're scanning it in...A lot of scanners have problems picking up shadow detail in them, and IF they can get it, will usually make it appear much more noisy/grainy than on the original.

 

[Ken N]

I won't say anything regarding darkroom printing of color films, as it has been about 20 years since I've attempted any Cibachromes. But I do scan color print films quite frequently. The "New" Portra films scan exceptionally well. 160NC and 160VC do very well on my Nikon Coolscan V-ED. I really like the grain of Fuji Reala, but the orange base is so dark that I'm not too pleased with the tonal gradients.

I see a marked improvement in scans with the "New" Portra as compared to the previous formula. The grain appears finer and the color gradients are fuller.

Ken

 

[Neal]

Hi Ross,

Not to worry. Fuji pro films print just fine in the darkroom.

Neal Wydra

 

[Thomas Wilson]

Papo, I agree about the minimal filtration for the Fuji 160 S & C. I have recently added the Kodak Portra 160 NC & VC to my film bag because the Fuji is getting hard to find in 220. My starting point with the Kodak is around 48 m & Y while the Fuji comes in around 27 m & y to start. I like both films but lean towards the Kodak for its finer grain. Call me nuts, but I also find the Kodak a little more soothing.