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.
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.
...then move up to large format...
Hello and welcome to APUGland from me too!
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
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.
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.
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
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.
Are you the hinge?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
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
Are you the hinge?
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.
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?
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
That looks like a great exposure and very sharp you can see the plane and its definition very well.
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
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?