I fully agree. However, are the differences between film characteristics significant enough to justify such a large portfolio for any one photographer?
I agree with that as well, but look at 2F/2F's list in post #12. How long would it take just to try them all?
...The OP is obviously paying a lab so, at least for now, that is the back end process. The OP is in good company in this respect, lots of great photographers did and do this. I'm not inclined to talk the OP out of that...
...Using a good lab does something almost magical, it provides the consistency in the process that allows the photographer to concentrate solely on camera work and film choice...
...Trying different films with a good lab behind you is pretty easy, just bracket the shots on the first roll, ask the lab questions about what you do and don't like in the results, and you can learn just about all you need to know to make really nice photos.
The thing to do, i think, is select one (1) film.
Get to know that,. Get to know hwo it behaves. Get to know what to do to coax the best out of it. What what you like about it. What you don't like about it. Try to find out what to do to get rid of the less likeable bits.
If you can't make it to do what you like (and you may arrive at the decision that you can't sooner, later, or never), then and only then look at another film.
he'll never look back.
That's how it was in the good-old-days. With labs closing left and right, consistency is hard to find. The 'good' labs lived off professionals. With them going digital, goods labs are going out of business or are getting very rare.
I agree, but the OP does not want to do that (cost prohibitive). Remember, £7 a roll. That's why I suggested self-processing to begin with.
Argh... we are going in circles.
I fully agree. However, are the differences between film characteristics significant enough to justify such a large portfolio for any one photographer?
...What I think he was saying is that he does not want to waste film, not that he is unwilling to pay...
Cyberspider, are you still there?
You asked for bright and good colour representation? Kodak Ektar is a great choice, or Fuji Reala. However, just about any colour film from Fuji or Kodak are great. Choose low speed. Post your pictures here for input and advice, if you feel like that.
best
Erik
We need to know what the OP wants from his/her landscape pix before any of us can answer. That was my only real point. Asking for "A Landscape Film" is a rather vague request.
So, what does the OP want? Color? Black and white? (We don't even know that, do we?) High contrast? Low contrast? Sharp? Not so sharp? Fine grained? Grainy? High resolution? Lower resolution? Natural color? Exaggerated color? Subdued color?
Anything can be used as "A Landscape Film". We have to know what the OP's desires are to answer the question specifically.
the first roll of film i had done was Kodak colorplus and to be honest i was not that impressed with the sharpness and clarity
plus i am interested in prossesing my film but i shoot colour too
and also looking at a few youtube vids it said 400 asa is good for the colour temp when shooting outside
now i see a comment of have a good lab well only one i have is jessops
p.s im male lol
adox cms20 in adotech.
now i see a comment of have a good lab well only one i have is jessops
im sorry im prob being dumb but "huh" :confused::confused:
adox cms20 in adotech.
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?