New to film photography, I need help in choosing the right film for my needs.

[alabdali]

Good luck returning film - most won't accept returns because it can be damaged by heat and moisture. Think of it like it was fresh produce .

But be sure to have fun, and feel free to share your results, and ask away.

I've talked to Adorama, they said that they shouldn't be able to accept it back, especially when some of the boxes are opened. They were supposed to get back to me yesterday, they didn't. We'll see what happens. I won't feel very upset if I wasn't able to return it (my wallet will) because I have the itch to shoot it anyways

 

[alabdali]

My advice to you would be once you have found a film that you like, use it and only it for a very very very long time so that you know everything about it and how it responds to different situations and you can look at a scene and see it rendered by your chosen film's characteristics and tones in your head and how it responds to reciprocity and have that data memorized and when you feel that you are ready, change your developer and then it's a whole new ballgame... repeat above..... exhale.

I agree and this is how I feel about it (so far) regarding black and white film. However, with color, my very short experience is telling me that it's not quite possible. I always find myself thinking: "how would Ektar look with portraits?" and "how would Portra look with landscapes?". I examined a lot of examples online but the ideal way to tell is to see my own results.

 

[alabdali]

...then move up to large format...

Whenever I hear the words "large format".. I picture Ansel Adams van! ... Looks like this is where the current takes you later...

 

[alabdali]

Hello and welcome to APUGland from me too!

Thanks!

 

[alabdali]

Hi,

There seems to be a lot of different opinions, which is fun. I agree with the principle to use as few films as possible, to learn their characteristics, and to focus on shooting pictures. However, I personally like to have the option of b/w (which I develop myself) and color.

Then, at least 2 film speed will help. ISO 100 with a yellow filter on an overcast day or indoors may cause some not so sharp pictures, while a sunny day might not be ideal at ISO 400 or 800.

Thus, 2x2 gives 4.

Thus, I'm sticking with my recommendation of with FP4+, Tri-X, Ektar and Portra.

Have fun!

Skickat från min GT-P5210 via Tapatalk

Kind of how I feel about it (except for the FP4+) because I'm thinking of staying with one b&w film.

 

[StoneNYC]

Agreed, just shoot them, you might find you like some of the options better than the ones you "decided to stick with first" so might as well try them all at this point lol

 

[alabdali]

Hello Saif

Congatulations on a great decision!

Because you are not going to develop or scan the film yourself, you should choose films that scan really well and do not need special developing routines etc.

Some films will produce good results only if you are very particular about developing and scanning and because that will be outside of your control you should avoid them. Tri-X is unfortunately one of these. Unless you have a good work flow the scans will look like mud. Ektar is a great film but I have had horrible labs scans. Only after using very good scanning and processing software myself did I unlock this film's magical colours.

In my experience Kodak Portra and T-MAX look good from most lab scans. They also should cover all of your needs.

So, start with Portra 160 + 400 and T-MAX 100 + 400 to get used to the film medium again. If after a while you find that they are lacking. Look for alternative films that have what you seek. But this is unlikely.

This is very interesting. I'm glad you brought this up because I hear people say "this film scans well and that one doesn't", however I have NO IDEA which is which. Printing black and white myself is what I want to be able of doing later, however, until then, I'd like to be able to get good scans, which makes me wonder how will Tri-X or HP5+ scan? -I haven't seen my results yet on either so I don't know yet which one I'll go with; TMAX and XP2 are waiting for their turn as well as

 

[MattKing]

There are a few Black and White film and developer combinations that are slightly more difficult to scan than others, but in general if a film is popular, people figure out how to scan it well.

There is an advantage to scanning the black and white films designed for processing in colour chemicals (Ilford XP2 and Kodak CN400). Their dye based images are compatible with IR based dust removal systems. But I would only recommend them as your main black and white films if your only access to developing is colour chemical developing. Most people don't have that restriction.

 

[alabdali]

Precisely why you SHOULD use filters with color film. Ektar gets complaints for looking blue in open shade for example. Well open shade light IS blue. Ektar is just more accurate about it than, say, Portra which is optimized to look more pleasing, particularly for flesh tones, than it is for accuracy. Same with slide film.

With black and white I almost always use a filter outdoors, most often a fairly mild yellow one. The main time I don't is for dim available light.

Before I read your comments, I was HOPING that there is some kind of a consensus on what filters to use and when (especially the 81A or a yellow filter). I was hesitant to ask because it's gonna be another broad question especially after knowing that each film is different and it's not only a matter of "use a warm filter with color" , "use a yellow filter with black and white"!

What I'm doing now is basically trial and error, put on the filter, take a couple of shots, take notes, remove it, take notes ... repeat .. lol

 

[markbarendt]

I've talked to Adorama, they said that they shouldn't be able to accept it back, especially when some of the boxes are opened. They were supposed to get back to me yesterday, they didn't. We'll see what happens. I won't feel very upset if I wasn't able to return it (my wallet will) because I have the itch to shoot it anyways

Love the one you're with. Well in this case, shoot the ones ya got.

 

[Wallendo]

I agree and this is how I feel about it (so far) regarding black and white film. However, with color, my very short experience is telling me that it's not quite possible. I always find myself thinking: "how would Ektar look with portraits?" and "how would Portra look with landscapes?". I examined a lot of examples online but the ideal way to tell is to see my own results.

Very few people marry their first crushes. Photography is like that. My contrarian view is to shoot as many different films as possible when starting and then sit pack and pick out a few to concentrate on. Once you have whittled down your list to a few films; e.g. one slow B&W, open fast b&W, and one color film, master those films and then expand when you reach the limitations of the film you chose and then expand your horizon.

 

[StoneNYC]

Very few people marry their first crushes. Photography is like that. My contrarian view is to shoot as many different films as possible when starting and then sit pack and pick out a few to concentrate on. Once you have whittled down your list to a few films; e.g. one slow B&W, open fast b&W, and one color film, master those films and then expand when you reach the limitations of the film you chose and then expand your horizon.

I used to be a film slut but now I'm in a happy poly-fidelitous relationship with the ones that treated me the best

 

[Truzi]

I used to be a film slut but now I'm in a happy poly-fidelitous relationship with the ones that treated me the best

Are you the hinge?

 

[alabdali]

Flatiron Vista on an overcast afternoon. Near Superior, CO.

so this is the Ektar 100. Honestly, I don't think the colors are exaggerated at all. However, it's not the film to get the right skin tones.
I have so many questions after I got my neg and photos back. I'm feeling so sleepy now to start asking. Lesson No. 1 for me though, DO NOT print at Costco! The scans had nothing to do with the prints ... I got the film developed for $1.89 though

 

[StoneNYC]

View attachment 88568

Flatiron Vista on an overcast afternoon. Near Superior, CO.

so this is the Ektar 100. Honestly, I don't think the colors are exaggerated at all. However, it's not the film to get the right skin tones.
I have so many questions after I got my neg and photos back. I'm feeling so sleepy now to start asking. Lesson No. 1 for me though, DO NOT print at Costco! The scans had nothing to do with the prints ... I got the film developed for $1.89 though

I've always had trouble with overblown skies, it just handles over exposure poorly IMHO.

Great image though! Sharp! This is 35mm?

 

[StoneNYC]

Are you the hinge?

I'm the sprocket I guess? The rotating sprocket that catches the film and swirls around with my advance lever...?

 

[alabdali]

I've always had trouble with overblown skies, it just handles over exposure poorly IMHO.

Great image though! Sharp! This is 35mm?

Thanks, this is actually a 50mm, it's my go-to landscape lens!

I'm having a hard time with the getting the right exposure. On multiple exposures, I get the skies right, the rest gets underexposed, and vice versa!!! I thought film latitude would compensate, obviously I'm doing something wrong.

 

[StoneNYC]

Thanks, this is actually a 50mm, it's my go-to landscape lens!

I'm having a hard time with the getting the right exposure. On multiple exposures, I get the skies right, the rest gets underexposed, and vice versa!!! I thought film latitude would compensate, obviously I'm doing something wrong.

No, ektar100 just doesn't have the sand latitude of something like Portta, you have to treat Ektar100 like a slide film.

Also I meant is this 35mm or 120 or is it sheet film?

 

[alabdali]

I believe this can be considered a correct exposure of the sky that afternoon. I still think the sky was overblown in my last image, however, that day, I had the problem of having the itch to take photos but the heavy overcast was not helping! I was thinking it would've been less apparent if I was shooting black and white, right?

 

[StoneNYC]

View attachment 88570


I believe this can be considered a correct exposure of the sky that afternoon. I still think the sky was overblown in my last image, however, that day, I had the problem of having the itch to take photos but the heavy overcast was not helping! I was thinking it would've been less apparent if I was shooting black and white, right?

Eventually, when you start to get some good money, and also I really invested, you would get something like a graduated neutral density filter, this is a filter that is only dense on one side, and you align that filter with this guy so the sky is reduced by a certain number of stops, these stops are variable depending on what kind of graduated neutral density filter you have.

That looks like a great exposure and very sharp you can see the plane and its definition very well.

 

[alabdali]

No, ektar100 just doesn't have the sand latitude of something like Portta, you have to treat Ektar100 like a slide film.

Also I meant is this 35mm or 120 or is it sheet film?

Oh sorry, I see what you mean now, it's a Nikon F3HP 35mm SLR.

Really?! Good to know that about Ektar! as I was being very liberal with changing the ISO setting, overexposing and underexposing like I have the whole latitude in the world

 

[StoneNYC]

Oh sorry, I see what you mean now, it's a Nikon F3HP 35mm SLR.

Really?! Good to know that about Ektar! as I was being very liberal with changing the ISO setting, overexposing and underexposing like I have the whole latitude in the world

I also have to apologize, I forgot which thread I was in, and I think I knew that you were using 35mm film, I just forgot, also, in general color negative film has a much broader latitude than transparency film, however this particular film has a little less than normal.

It was designed specifically to replace one of their transparency films that was very popular, and since Kodak decided to discontinue the entire transparency line, they came out with this film in order to replace it has to not upset customers, they did their best and it's not a bad film, just takes a little more precision.

 

[alabdali]

That looks like a great exposure and very sharp you can see the plane and its definition very well.

I call this my World War II shot

 

[alabdali]

Eventually, when you start to get some good money, and also I really invested, you would get something like a graduated neutral density filter, this is a filter that is only dense on one side, and you align that filter with this guy so the sky is reduced by a certain number of stops, these stops are variable depending on what kind of graduated neutral density filter you have.

I must tell you that, so far, I do this for the pleasure of it, I don't know if I'm ever gonna make money out of it, I would love to though....

I already have some ND filters, not the graduated ones though. I have used a graduated filter before, my only thing against it is having to put the holder on the lens, put the filter, adjust how high you want the darkened portion to be, not mentioning keeping the filter clean... too much work for a lazy person like me, I totally believe that you can make great images using one though. Eventually, I might give up and just get one after too many overexposed skies...lol

 

[StoneNYC]

I must tell you that, so far, I do this for the pleasure of it, I don't know if I'm ever gonna make money out of it, I would love to though....

I already have some ND filters, not the graduated ones though. I have used a graduated filter before, my only thing against it is having to put the holder on the lens, put the filter, adjust how high you want the darkened portion to be, not mentioning keeping the filter clean... too much work for a lazy person like me, I totally believe that you can make great images using one though. Eventually, I might give up and just get one after too many overexposed skies...lol

Enjoy it and see where it takes you.