Need Film Recommendation.

Patzer · Feb 19, 2008

Hello,

I am new to the forum. I did photography for quite awhile, and am returning after a hiatus since 1994.
I am interested in trying a color print film, c41 process.

My former favorite color films were transparency films:

Kodachrome 25, 200 in 35mm format.
Velvia 50 in 35mm, 120, 4x5.

I am now using 35mm and 120.

While I may on occasion do some "street shooting" or environmental portraits, the primary application will be landscapes.

Sharpness and detail aree important.

Thank you in advance for any recommendations.

Ian Grant · Feb 19, 2008

Do you still want to shoot colour ?

Stick to the Fuji Velvia it's still about the best on the market.

Ian

tim_walls · Feb 19, 2008

Ian Grant said:
Do you still want to shoot colour ?

Stick to the Fuji Velvia it's still about the best on the market.

Ian

Gaahhh, heathen . Give me Ektachrome E100VS over Velvia any day of the week .

Patzer · Feb 19, 2008

Ian Grant said:
Do you still want to shoot colour ?

Stick to the Fuji Velvia it's still about the best on the market.

Ian

Yes, Velvia is available agin in iso 50, and i still like it.
But I am looking for a PRINT film in color.
Thanks.

tim_walls · Feb 19, 2008

I would guess Portra 160VC is going to be up your street, or Fuji Pro 160C. I've not shot enough colour print to be able to make a recommendation though (I've only just started looking at C41, having shot exclusively E6 up 'til now.)

Ian Grant · Feb 19, 2008

Then the Fuji Reala or Superia are great print films.

Ian

Uhner · Feb 19, 2008

Welcome to Apug Patzer

I think you should consider Fuji Reala if you’re after a sharp colour negative film. However, this advise is not based on personal experience but from conversations with other photographers.

Claes

Patzer · Feb 19, 2008

Uhner said:
...Fuji Reala

Is that available in 120 format?

Uhner · Feb 19, 2008

Patzer said:
Is that available in 120 format?

Yes, Reala is available in 120.

Mick Humble · Feb 19, 2008

Re:Fuki Reala

Hi,
in my experience Reala tends to look flat. I'm sticking with Superia which is available in 135 & 120.

Cheers

Mick

Mick Humble · Feb 19, 2008

Oops typo, I meant Fuji Reala. Sorry. Mick

copake_ham · Feb 20, 2008

Patzer said:
Hello,

I am new to the forum. I did photography for quite awhile, and am returning after a hiatus since 1994.
I am interested in trying a color print film, c41 process.

My former favorite color films were transparency films:

Kodachrome 25, 200 in 35mm format.
Velvia 50 in 35mm, 120, 4x5.

I am now using 35mm and 120.

While I may on occasion do some "street shooting" or environmental portraits, the primary application will be landscapes.

Sharpness and detail aree important.

Thank you in advance for any recommendations.

I think that like I did a couple of years ago, you want to move from E-6 'chromes to shooting print negatives.

My guess is that you use to show slides and now you've gotten a scanner and want to try out the wider range of C-41 films?

I've been doing the same and suggest you try Kodak's Portra films. These are highly-advanced color print films which have been optimized for scanning. The speeds range from 160 to 800 and include both "natural color" (NC) and "vivid color" (VC) versions.

All are worth trying out to find your favorite - given whatever lighting conditions you're dealing with.

Now, on this site, you will find few fans of color film photography generally. And of those that do enjoy shooting color film - very few of the non-Americans will ever recommend Kodak films.

That's just the way this site is. But if you are capable of rising above the prejudices of this site and give K's Portra a try - I think you will be quite pleased with the results.

PM me if you like to chat more on this.

Dinesh · Feb 20, 2008

copake_ham said:
And of those that do enjoy shooting color film - very few of the non-Americans will ever recommend Kodak films.

That's just the way this site is.

Keep stirring that pot! :rolleyes:

Ole · Feb 20, 2008

copake_ham said:
Now, on this site, you will find few fans of color film photography generally. And of those that do enjoy shooting color film - very few of the non-Americans will ever recommend Kodak films. ...

That's funny - I far prefer Kodak's colour rendition. I only use Fuji because a visiting photographer decided to leave me a few packs of 4x5", and my Kodak films are all 13x18cm...

jd callow · Feb 20, 2008

George what planet are you from and do you have a return ticket?

No c41 film is going to be as sharp as an E6 film of similar speed. I'd recommend you shoot Fuji's 160s and 160c as well as kodak's iso 160 portra films. Rate them at 80 to 100 (they will work at 160, but they'll have better shadow, greater sharpness and no chance of the highlights blocking at 1/2 the box speed) and ask that the Fuji be printed on Crystal Archive Type 'c' in gloss and the kodak printed on Endura Ultra or Supra gloss. This will give you an idea of how these films look on their own and in comparison. The one exception here is 160nc on endura portra paper. These two are a wonderful match, but maybe not great for rocks and trees.

Like Ole, I also prefer kodak over fuji.

Good luck and enjoy the site.

<edit>
Reala is the perfect film for the Caribbean It can render bright colours and wild contrast without issue. In low or moderate contrast settings it will suffer. It is also a really fine grained and cheap film. FWIW I'd test rate this film at 50-64. One thing about Fuji films is that they will block up faster than kodak films.

Ian Grant · Feb 20, 2008

copake_ham said:
Now, on this site, you will find few fans of color film photography generally. And of those that do enjoy shooting color film - very few of the non-Americans will ever recommend Kodak films.
That's just the way this site is. But if you are capable of rising above the prejudices of this site and give K's Portra a try

Back in the days of E4 film many of us in Europe began using Fujichrome because it's contrast and colour rendition was far better than the equivalent Kodak products, except Kodachrome. Then when E6 was introduced the Fuji professional films had better batch to batch consistency which was important for commercial use.

Both Kodak & Fuji make film in Europe, so it's good to support locally produced products

Ian

Uhner · Feb 20, 2008

jd callow said:
No c41 film is going to be as sharp as an E6 film of similar speed. I'd recommend you shoot Fuji's 160s and 160c as well as kodak's iso 160 portra films. Rate them at 80 to 100 (they will work at 160, but they'll have better shadow, greater sharpness and no chance of the highlights blocking at 1/2 the box speed) and ask that the Fuji be printed on Crystal Archive Type 'c' in gloss and the kodak printed on Endura Ultra or Supra gloss. This will give you an idea of how these films look on their own and in comparison. The one exception here is 160nc on endura portra paper. These two are a wonderful match, but maybe not great for rocks and trees.

Cool. I got six boxes of Portra 160 4x5” in the fridge and I was just about to ask how to make the best of them.

Cheers

Claes

IloveTLRs · Feb 20, 2008

Another vote for Fuji Reala. Very nice film.
For natural color Porta NC is good, VC is good for vivid color.

They're all available in 35mm & 120.

Personally I'd avoid Superia; I find it too washed-out for my liking.

Neal · Feb 20, 2008

Dear Patzer,

There are no dogs in the current crop of C-41 products from Fuji or Kodak. Why not start cheap and work your way up the price ladder?

Neal Wydra

Vonder · Feb 20, 2008

Despite the unfortunate circumstance of being an American, I prefer Fuji films across the board. Reala is my standard film. Great color, fine grain - I have no idea where the comment came from that C41 films are grainier than E6 equivalents. For general slide work I use Fuji Astia, which is nice without being oversaturated like the Velvia and Provia lines can be. One Kodak exception - their 200 speed Gold C41 film is great stuff. That extra stop of speed is nice to have.

I agree with Neal, there are no bad films today, at least not from Kodak or Fuji. The only real reason to choose one or the other is availability or politics. Go ahead. Show the world how stupid Americans are by shooting only Fuji.

removed account4 · Feb 20, 2008

i am a fan of superia film as well.
i kind of like color rendition,
but some of the kodak films
with their softer color pallette
are nice too.
don't shoot many chromes, and when
i do, it is expired fuji velveeta or np ...

have fun + welcome abord

john

Michel Hardy-Vallée · Feb 20, 2008

Welcome to APUG Patzer. As the others said, no C41 film is crappy nowadays. Pick a roll of comparable products from Kodak & Fuji, and follow your taste. I have a slight preference for using pro films, but you can get some pretty nice results out of consumer film as well.

As JD said, best to print Fuji on Fuji, and Kodak on Kodak. At least in my experience, that's true. I print mostly B&W, but I dabble a bit in RA4, and when it works, it's really fun.

panastasia · Feb 24, 2008

This may not be helpful regarding choices today but I did extensive color processing up until about 10 years ago: I preferred the color saturation of Kodak materials over Fuji (film and Paper) - more "natural look" as someone else said. Personally, I never cared for ramped-up color saturation (digital cameras have a built in switch for doing the same thing, it's called "enhanced color").

There is a claim that Fuji color material are more stable (long lasting) when compared to Kodak materials. My feelings about this are based on what I perceive as honest marketing. Kodak offers real (historical) data about their products if you inquire about them, and the data shows me that they are not hiding any truth. Fuji, on the other hand, makes a claim about color permanence based on, so called, accelerated testing (maybe the testing is done by an independent researcher, I'm not sure). The claim states that Fuji colors will last fifty years - Kodak makes no such claim, AFAIK. Must we wait 50 years to see if the claim has merit, I believe we must. Unless you believe accelerated testing methods equal historical (real) data.

Please understand, I'm only expressing my personal opinion.

Need Film Recommendation.

Patzer

Ian Grant

tim_walls

Patzer

tim_walls

Ian Grant

Uhner

Patzer

Uhner

Mick Humble

Mick Humble

copake_ham

Dinesh

Ole

Moderator

jd callow

Moderator

Ian Grant

Uhner

IloveTLRs

Neal

Vonder

removed account4

Michel Hardy-Vallée

Membership Council

panastasia

Need Film Recommendation.

Moderator

Moderator

Membership Council

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency