Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 73,140   Posts: 1,613,785   Online: 1205
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28
  1. #21
    benjiboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    U.K.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    7,487

    Confused

    Quote Originally Posted by Sal Santamaura View Post
    Another vote for Astia, but it's not available in 120mm. As far as I'm aware no film is. Fuji does sell Astia in 120 though; that's about 60mm wide.

    First on-line images I've seen from new ISO 50 "Velvia II" indicate it might not be as horrible for people as the original was. No Fuji Web sites yet seem to have any technical data or product brochures posted yet though.
    What is 120mm film Sal ?, I think you are mistaken, 120 is just a number for a type of film that is roughly 60mm wide, not a size. When Kodak started making roll film in the 19th century they started numbering them with the number 100 so 120 was the 20th film type they produced, as 35mm(135) was the 135th.
    Ben

  2. #22
    Helen B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Hell's Kitchen, New York, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,557
    Images
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by benjiboy View Post
    What is 120mm film Sal ?, I think you are mistaken, 120 is just a number for a type of film that is roughly 60mm wide, not a size. When Kodak started making roll film in the 19th century they started numbering them with the number 100 so 120 was the 20th film type they produced, as 35mm(135) was the 135th.
    Ben,

    I read Sal's post to be correct, and it seems to say the same as your post - that there is no 120 mm film, but there is 120 film, and it is 60 mm wide.

    Best,
    Helen
    PS So 110 was the 10th film that Kodak produced, and 126 was the 26th? It seems to be too much of a coincidence that 35 mm film was the 35th (not 135th) film that Kodak produced. Surely they just put a '1' in front of the width? A helpful and easily remembered designation for a cassette of 35 mm film rather than a plain roll of 35 mm film - because 35 mm film predates 135 cassettes.

    Then I Googled and found this:

    http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/tphs-filmnumbers.html
    Last edited by Helen B; 07-06-2007 at 08:03 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Italia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,679
    Maybe but 120 came after various other same sized films. I think 120 was supposed to be 12 6x6. The older films were 6x9 I guess by 8. Then somebody figured out you could put more then one set of numbers on the paper backing and sell the same film for multiple cameras.

  4. #24
    benjiboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    U.K.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    7,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Helen B View Post
    Ben,

    I read Sal's post to be correct, and it seems to say the same as your post - that there is no 120 mm film, but there is 120 film, and it is 60 mm wide.

    Best,
    Helen
    PS So 110 was the 10th film that Kodak produced, and 126 was the 26th? It seems to be too much of a coincidence that 35 mm film was the 35th (not 135th) film that Kodak produced. Surely they just put a '1' in front of the width? A helpful and easily remembered designation for a cassette of 35 mm film rather than a plain roll of 35 mm film - because 35 mm film predates 135 cassettes.

    Then I Googled and found this:

    http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/tphs-filmnumbers.html
    Helen, this was a typo I ment to type 35th.
    Ben

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    726
    I too would vote for Portra NC. I assume by 120mm you actually mean 120 roll film. I prefer neg films for people shots as it is a lot more forgiving of the slight exposure errors you tend to get when working quickly.

    David

  6. #26
    benjiboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    U.K.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    7,487
    I think both Kodak Portra 160 NC and Fuji Pro 160 s are both superb people films especially devised for "social photography" ( portrait, weddings etc.) and, a photographer needs to try them and see which one he prefers, you will get as many opinions as to which is best as we have members
    Ben

  7. #27
    Davec101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cambridge, U.K
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    896
    Images
    125
    Hi all, whats a good film for colour still life photography, have started using velvia 100F (120), but would like to try a similar print film.

    thanks
    Platinum Printing Editions http://www.dceditions.com
    The Art of Platinum Printing Blog http://artofplatinum.wordpress.com/
    Alternative Photographic Processes blog http://altphotoblog.com/

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,075

    Fuji Reala

    Quote Originally Posted by Davec101 View Post
    Hi all, whats a good film for colour still life photography, have started using velvia 100F (120), but would like to try a similar print film.

    thanks
    In my mind, Reala is the closest print film there is to Velvia. Even then, it's not Velvia. Only Velvia is Velvia. Perhaps Reala is closer to Provia. Perhaps I've had too much coffee today.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin