which film?

[stompyq]

I am slowly trying film (4x5) after a long stint with digital (not giving up!!!). Anyway my experiances have been primarily with fuji velvia 100 and b/w film with MF. I ve been looking at kodak E100G film b/c it supposedly has more dynamic range than velvia. Has anybody tryed it? how does it compare to E100VS or velvia. Be advised that i will be scanning all my 4x5 film.
Also since i am going to scan them is there any point shooting slides instead of print film? I could do with the increased latitude of print film!!

 

[reellis67]

I've used the 100G, as a matter of fact I've got two boxes in the fridge right now. I like the colors, but I don't use the other film you mentioned so I can't make a direct comparison. I prefer the G to the other films that are more saturated, but that is more of a personal preference than anything else. It scans well, and I've always been happy with it, but if I were scanning, I would use negative film, especialy if you want more latitude. For me, I just love those giant chromes. I need to try some 8x10s, but the cost is prohibitive...

- Randy

 

[HerrBremerhaven]

E100G has more natural skintones than E100VS. However, if you want really saturated yellows or reds, then E100VS is a great choice. E100G is slightly less contrasty than E100VS.

In Fuji films, Astia 100F is a good comparison to Kodak E100G. In general, the dark greens response is better in E100G, medium green tone response is better in Astia 100F, and lighter greens are about equal. Contrast, grain, and scanning performance are quite close. I tend to prefer skintones on Astia 100F over what 100G renders, but the difference is subtle.

The advantage of colour transparency is that you can directly view the colours, and compare that to any final prints made. I often see comments about greater latitude in colour negative film, but that should never imply that it is difficult to get nice results from transparency film. You can be further off on your exposure with colour negative, so if you are less sure about your equipment accuracy, or don't ever want to bracket an exposure, then just use colour negative. If you have a reasonably accurate light meter, and your shutters on your 4x5 are fairly close to accurate, then you will have few issues with using transparency film.

Scanning is something better left to other forums. You will find few answers on APUG. I suggest posting your same question to the Large Format Photography Forum:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/index.php

You will find more answers there, especially since the kind of scanner and scanning software you use make a huge difference in results, sometimes more difference than your choice of film. Nearly all newer films scan quite well on good gear run with good software by an experienced scanner operator.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat

 

[Helen B]

...Also since i am going to scan them is there any point shooting slides instead of print film? I could do with the increased latitude of print film!!

It's that word 'latitude' again. To some people it means 'room for exposure error' and to others it means 'flexibility and ability to cope with a wide scene brightness range'. If you wish to record details over a wide scene brightness range, as I do when shooting landscape, then use colour negative. Because Kodak 100UC isn't available in 4x5 I use Fuji Pro 160S almost exclusively. It has very low graininess and scans well. There are plenty of examples in my Garden Notebooks portfolio, viewable via the link in my signature. Because they are all scanned negatives that are unlikely to be printed optically I keep them out of the APUG gallery.

Best,
Helen

 

[c6h6o3]

If you wish to record details over a wide scene brightness range, as I do when shooting landscape, then use colour negative.

EPY also has a longer scale than the daylight balanced chromes, and unlike negative film, responds well to zone system controls (at least from about -2 to +2).

BTW, Garden Notebooks #19 is especially lovely. Was that made on Provia? If so I'll have to try some.

 

[Helen B]

Thanks very much. Number 19 was made on Pro 160S, in fact.

Best,
Helen

 

[nworth]

I've been using E100G as an MF transparency film. It is very easy to use. The colors are good, but I find them a little blue for much of my work. The grain is as fine as Velvia, and the sharpness is just barely less than E100VS. The latitude is a quite a bit better than Velvia, and the contrast is less. The contrast is comparable to E100VS and a bit less than EPP, which is my usual 4X5 color film. Helen is right, however. If latitude (or just plain dynamic range) is an issue, go with a negative film. Grain is usually not much of an issue at 4X5, and 400UC is available in 4X5. I use the MF version a lot, and I'm very happy with it.