It's back to film for moi, but what's what these days...

[arionelli]

OK, I'm renewing my interest in film and cameras 67 & 66 after playing (toying) around in the digital world...I would like to hear what the consensus these days is on the different films, best uses for same, availabilities, etc in 120...B+W fine grain for landscape, something perhaps a little grainier for portraits, the benefits of Kodak Portra 160 for landscape and 400 for people, Fuji Velvia 50 vs 100 vs Provia 100 in the slide world, newcomers.
Also, does anyone know of a good and reliable processing firm in Australia (pref on east coast but doesn't really matter these days)...
Lastly, about getting into the scanning thing, at least a Nikon unit for 120 film, correct? I guess I can't altogether avoid the digital thing as I'm not really keen to do my own chemistry.
Any suggestions would be beneficial and appreciated... the more the merrier, please.
Many thanks in advance
Martin

 

[Xmas]

If you want 127 film order from ilford's ULF today. Or wait till fall of 16.
You may be too late for Aus dealers cause of IDL.

I'd order some Acros soon as well.

Labs are closing in London but we still can drop off and collect within walking distance.

 

[Jager]

Digital/hybrid discussions are frowned upon here. So, with a squinting, sidelong glance... I'll just say that Nikon is no longer in the scanning game. You can post a question over on DPUG if you want to chat about that in greater detail.

Depending upon how long it's been since you left, film hasn't changed too much. The standbys you mention are still mostly available. Labs have closed everywhere. But there's still reasonable access to C41 processing. E6 a bit less so. Black and white less so, still. You'd definitely be well-served to at least dip your toe into developing that. Simple and fun and allows creative control.

You have your camera(s)?

 

[film_man]

The consensus on films is that they are all great and it really comes down to personal preference. Do you prefer Portra or 400H colours? Do you like punchy reds with Ektar or a more controlled Portra 160 look? Same for BW, one man's grainy is another one's atmospheric and so on. Best thing is to shoot a roll each and see what you think.

As for labs, have heard nothing but good things for these guys http://rdfl.com.au/ though them being in Aus and me in the UK I haven't used them myself. They will also scan your film and one thing I learned over the years is that if I'm spending the time and money to shoot film I might as well pay someone to do it professionally instead of spending a couple of hours in the evening scanning and tweaking colours from colour negs. If you really want to do it yourself I had a V700 and while the results were ok I never managed to get anything near what I get from my lab but others may have done better.

 

[BrianShaw]

...B+W fine grain for landscape, something perhaps a little grainier for portraits, the benefits of Kodak Portra 160 for landscape and 400 for people, ...

why?

 

[Sirius Glass]

Welcome to APUG

I use and recommend Kodak Portra for color prints in 135mm, 120, and 4"x5" film.
I use and recommend Kodak Tri-X and Ilford Hp5+ for black & white prints in 135mm and 120 film.
I use and recommend lford Hp5+ for black & white prints in 4"x5" film, since Kodak no longer sells Tri-X in that size.

I use replenished XTOL as a black & white film developer and this is why:

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/prof...wFilmProcessing/selecting.jhtml?pq-path=14053

Finer grain, sharper edges, shadow detail and smoother continuous tones.

 

[arionelli]

Thanks Jager and Film Man,

DPUG - noted...

I may try sometime in the future but presently in no position to set up a darkroom...

Mammies RB RZ C330 some Blad - got all my bits (more than I need, really)

 

[tomfrh]

OK, I'm renewing my interest in film and cameras 67 & 66 after playing (toying) around in the digital world...I would like to hear what the consensus these days is on the different films, best uses for same, availabilities, etc in 120...B+W fine grain for landscape, something perhaps a little grainier for portraits, the benefits of Kodak Portra 160 for landscape and 400 for people, Fuji Velvia 50 vs 100 vs Provia 100 in the slide world, newcomers.
Also, does anyone know of a good and reliable processing firm in Australia (pref on east coast but doesn't really matter these days)...
Lastly, about getting into the scanning thing, at least a Nikon unit for 120 film, correct? I guess I can't altogether avoid the digital thing as I'm not really keen to do my own chemistry.
Any suggestions would be beneficial and appreciated... the more the merrier, please.
Many thanks in advance
Martin

I'm a relative novice in film. I use mainly Velvia 50, Velvia 100, Provia 100, Provia 400X, Agfa C100. I use it for projection. I like velvia 100 the best. It's faster and it always seems to come out better than velvia 50. But some peopel swear by velvia 50. Provias are more neutral. Provia 400X is good for a bit more speed. Agfa 100 is a cheap alternative to provia 100. Some people say it is provia 100.

I mainly buy film on ebay and process in Vision image lab in Redfern Sydney. They turn around in a couple of hours. They can scan too. Sometimes I scan by using a macro lens and lightbox.

 

[film_man]

Thanks Jager and Film Man,

DPUG - noted...

I may try sometime in the future but presently in no position to set up a darkroom...

Mammies RB RZ C330 some Blad - got all my bits (more than I need, really)

You have an RB and a RZ and a blad and a C330? That's a good selection there!

 

[Paul Verizzo]

OP, don't let the Purity Police here stop you from scanning your film. A wet darkroom is many things, some good and some not so much, but convenient, never. Even when all set up and ready to go and all you really want to do is make a few non-art prints to show friends and family.

The hybrid "darkroom" is a godsend. We can still indulge in all that good film-y fun and technology, and then have positive images in minutes. You can correct and manipulate in seconds what would take hours, days, or even can't do in the wet darkroom. And, if you discover you have the next Weston/Adams/Lange, just send the film to a custom lab. Best of both worlds.

If there's anything that's going to keep film a viable alternative, it's the hybrid darkroom. Especially as, um, youngsters discover film but don't have access to a wet darkroom, the hybrid is where they are.

The days of dedicated Minolta/Nikon film scanners are about dead. Most of those antiques use ports that current computers don't even have! To say nothing of software compatibility. Canon and Epson make a number of excellent scanners. I mostly use a Canon 8800F, the only downside being that it can't do LF or many slides at a time. The lamp area in the lid is too narrow. I have an old Canon 9000F that can scan a lot of slides or LF. One big technology leap in scanners has been going to LED lamps instead of a fluorescent tube. LED's, like the 8800F, have no warm up and are color consistent.

If you want more info on this, PM me. I have taught a class, "Preserving your family's photo heritage," and I have some materials available in selecting scanners.

OK, Purity Police, I'm leaving..................and keeping film alive.

FYI, the Hybrid Darkroom forum on APUG/DPUG seems to be dead, I just signed up the other day.

 

[Jager]

If there's anything that's going to keep film a viable alternative, it's the hybrid darkroom. Especially as, um, youngsters discover film but don't have access to a wet darkroom, the hybrid is where they are.

I agree.

 

[mitrajoon]

Not just young folk. Even us geezers are more inclined to go back to film because of the ability to scan and post process. I can understand not allowing digital post processing discussions, but not being able to discuss scanning issues in this forum is silly and counter productive. Please, who ever is the deity that controls such things, revisit the policy.

 

[BrianShaw]

Why not discuss it on Dpug and make that sister site active? That venue exists so no policy changes required.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Just sent you a PM on some hybrid workflow thoughts...

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Why not discuss it on Dpug and make that sister site active? That venue exists so no policy changes required.

Because it's like entering a huge aircraft hanger and when you say "Hello?" it echoes and echoes and no one answers. Hopefully the new upcoming structure of the site will change this...

 

[Paul Verizzo]

The name of this forum is "Film, Paper, and Chemistry." Sticking to the semantics, that does not disallow hybrid processing. It doesn't say what kind of paper ( ), nor does it say enlarging or contact printing only.

I'm thinking that not so many years ago, when film processing and printing options were relatively abundant and scanners were dedicated, slow, and expensive, there were some purists who pee'd on the APUG hydrant and staked turf.

I think it's time for a change. If people want to scan because that's the only, or the most logical work flow for them, and kit keeps film sales up and stimulating, I say we should run that old dog off.

 

[Meyer Trioplan]

Like the OP, I got back into film a little less than a year ago, and while the options had become more limited from what I remembered, I found the whole process of experimenting with different film and camera combinations to be very rewarding. I'm no big fan of C-41 films, but love Velvia, Provia, and even Agfa CR200 for certain subjects that suit its retro palette. On the black and while side, I like the "mainstream" options out there from Kodak, Fuji, and Ilford, but have a certain love for Rollei RPX25 and Fomapan 200.

I will say that had I not been able to get an affordable scanner to do post-processing, NONE of this rekindled love for film would have ever happened. The hybrid darkroom experience is the only thing making it possible, partly due to economics, available space and time, and even safety around kids and pets. I've read people express their beliefs here that a hybrid set up is counter intuitive, opining that if you are going to post process something, you may as well shoot on digital, but I respectfully disagree. I like the look film gives (as well as the need to THINK prior to shooting since you can't see the results and then adjust accordingly), and pretty much any attempt I've ever seen to replicate its look on a digital image is very apparent. Shooting via film and then scanning gives one a great starting point, and I find I only need modest tweaks to get the desired result, versus using excessive filters to simulate its look.

Sure I'd love to have a wet darkroom but it just is not possible.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Please, who ever is the deity that controls such things, revisit the policy.

Beat to death the horse is. Take the time to search for the discussion and history of how this came about and you will not want to request a policy change. Many smart people carefully studied and discussed the issue.

I started to use hybrid and found that the ink costs were so high and the stink-jet print quality so low that it was much cheaper to set up a darkroom. Enlargers are almost free on Craigs List and enlarging lenses are cheap. Put up the curtains, set up the equipment, print, dry, take down the curtains and put away the equipment.

Ever try to tone a stink-jet print? You cannot get there from here.

 

[MattKing]

Most on APUG here have no problem with a hybrid process.

The problem is with those trying to discuss hybrid processes in the main forum on APUG.

If you want an invigorated DPUG and specialized hybrid forum on APUG, go to it. You have my support.

OP, don't let the Purity Police here stop you from scanning your film. A wet darkroom is many things, some good and some not so much, but convenient, never. Even when all set up and ready to go and all you really want to do is make a few non-art prints to show friends and family.

The hybrid "darkroom" is a godsend. We can still indulge in all that good film-y fun and technology, and then have positive images in minutes. You can correct and manipulate in seconds what would take hours, days, or even can't do in the wet darkroom. And, if you discover you have the next Weston/Adams/Lange, just send the film to a custom lab. Best of both worlds.

If there's anything that's going to keep film a viable alternative, it's the hybrid darkroom. Especially as, um, youngsters discover film but don't have access to a wet darkroom, the hybrid is where they are.

The days of dedicated Minolta/Nikon film scanners are about dead. Most of those antiques use ports that current computers don't even have! To say nothing of software compatibility. Canon and Epson make a number of excellent scanners. I mostly use a Canon 8800F, the only downside being that it can't do LF or many slides at a time. The lamp area in the lid is too narrow. I have an old Canon 9000F that can scan a lot of slides or LF. One big technology leap in scanners has been going to LED lamps instead of a fluorescent tube. LED's, like the 8800F, have no warm up and are color consistent.

If you want more info on this, PM me. I have taught a class, "Preserving your family's photo heritage," and I have some materials available in selecting scanners.

OK, Purity Police, I'm leaving..................and keeping film alive.

FYI, the Hybrid Darkroom forum on APUG/DPUG seems to be dead, I just signed up the other day.

 

[shutterfinger]

For B&W film in 120, fine grain, Delta 100 or TMax 100. I have some Rollei RPX25 but have yet to try it. For medium grain Delta 400 or TMax 400. For coarser grain there is TriX or HP5+. I have some Arista EDU 100 and 400 from Freestyle. I use the Arista EDU 400 in 120 and 4x5 for camera testing after repairs. Arista EDU is made for Freestyle by Foma. It may be FomaPan rebadged.
For Hi Bird I suggest a Pulstek scanner for 35mm and a Epson V600 for 120. I have Epson V500 and V700, both discontinued. The specs for the V500 and V600 are the same. The V700 is for 4x5 and larger. I have 35mm scanned on a Pulstek 7200 that will produce gallery quality 16 x 20 prints on a high end printer. If I were doing gallery work I would take the negative or slide to a pro lab and have them drum scanned or wet printed. 4X5 can be scanned in 2 passes and on the V600, stitched in PS. If you are unfamiliar with scanning take a good negative and slide that will hold up to critical evaluation under a loupe and light table. Scan at default or full auto setting. Switch to manual/professional mode and make as scan at default. Use a resolution of 300dpi to 600dpi. Evaluate the results in Image Editing software at 100%. Start making adjustments in 10% increments of one variable only until unacceptable results are achieved, fine tune as desired. Retset to neutral and repeat with the next variable until all variables have been tested then try in conjunction with another using 2 variables then 3 or more until you have established the limit of each and their interaction. It will take 16 to 20 hours but is time well invested. The equivalent in wet printing with an enlarger could well take 30 to 40 hours. Once you know your scanner and software it will take you less than 5 hours to learn a new scanner or software just as once you know how to wet print switching to a different enlarger and or lens only takes a few test prints to find the optimal setting.

Enjoy.

 

[arionelli]

to all...

Thank you for your replies as I'm getting lots of food for thought...didn't know that many of you guys here are so 'hardcore' about the whole analogue process, but good to see that it's coming from such definite and personal perspectives (reminds me of my hi fi days)...btw, the point of my having acquired a few cameras is that when I get more time I'll kindle my own preferences a little more and whittle the cupboard down to a more basic, more effective kit.
Martin

 

[alanrockwood]

... You can post a question over on DPUG if you want to chat about that in greater detail...

Yes, except that DPUG is more or less moribund.

 

[Hatchetman]

My advice is to get a slide projector!

 

[Paul Verizzo]

My advice is to get a slide projector!

Groan.

How many people scattered when Uncle Harry brought out his slide trays of the last vacation in the Bahamas?

I do still have many slides and a projector, but the fact of the matter is that scanning those slides into digital, being able to share them as people want, is light years ahead of real slides.

 

[Hatchetman]

LOL. I don't even know where to start with that. Just use an iPhone then.