Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,338   Posts: 1,537,724   Online: 795
      
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 33
  1. #1
    snegron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Hot, Muggy, Florida
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    796

    35 mm Postive or Negative Film?

    Just for the sake of curiosity, common consensus, and the intent on sharing experiences with other fellow film users, which do you prefer and why? Which produces better results in your particular style or choice of subject matter? Have you gone from negative film to postive film or vice versa? Which do you prefer for scanning?

    I am currently experimenting with slide film and I find it easier to handle while scanning. However, the skin tones on negative film (Ports series) appear to be more accurate. The drawbacks I have encountered with negative film is that the grain is much more visible in just about every ISO sensitivity.

  2. #2
    Markok765's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,270
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    24
    I use only slide film for color, aside from fuji 800z for reportage.
    i use negs for B&W, but i would one day like to develop FP4 as a slide
    Marko Kovacevic
    Blog
    Youtube

  3. #3
    Dave Parker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,049
    I use slide film for virtually every thing except images that contain people, I don't like the skin tone rendering on chromes, so use print for that, but everything else, landscape, products, commercial, wildlife, etc. is chrome.

    Dave

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    10
    print film most of the time. why? because it has greater exposure latitude. and because i can get better prints from them...that's the most important bit because i like putting pictures in frames, physical albums, wallet, car, etc. and also, print film offers some nice 800 and 1600 speed films...even a 3200 b&w film. in addition, most of my subjects or people...and i like print film better for photographing people.

    however...if i know i want to scan them into digital format, i prefer slide film. less grain...and i just seem to get better results when scanning slides.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,370
    Reversal. I'm going to weep bitter tears when my stock of KM is exhausted.

    Why limit yourself to 35 mm?

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,879
    Images
    11
    Most of my shooting is B&W negative film in all formats through 8x10. I print it (contacts and projection prints) . I occasionally shoot color neg in 35mm.
    Tom Hoskinson
    ______________________________

    Everything is analog - even digital :D

  7. #7
    JBrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,780
    Chrome for serious color work -120 and LF. I rarely shoot 35 for serious work. (unless a special circumstance dictates negative, 35mm or both)

    35mm negative for color snaps. C41 b&w for B&W snaps( forgiving latitude, price, and availability when traveling)

    Negative for serious b&w work- 120 and LF

  8. #8
    snegron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Hot, Muggy, Florida
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    796
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Fromm View Post
    Reversal. I'm going to weep bitter tears when my stock of KM is exhausted.

    Why limit yourself to 35 mm?
    Funny you should ask! I will be doing an informal experiment this weekend with Velvia 100 in both 35 and 120! For the 120 I am debating whether to go 6x7 or 645 (depends on how much weight I want to carry around under the sun). I have never shot slide film in 120. I am hoping to take two shots per image, one with the 35 the other with 120. I will be doing a combination of people and landscape just to see how this film measures up. I am assuming 120 will deliver better results, but the idea is to see what tonal range, grain, and overall color accuracy will be.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    415
    I shoot negs... for all the reasons celerystalksme mentioned. I've only scanned negs, though, so I have no comparison as far as slide scanning goes.

    FWIW, I've been told that there're some significant differences among 35mm scanners regarding the way they handle slides. Apparently, some are more "slide friendly" than others.

  10. #10
    snegron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Hot, Muggy, Florida
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    796
    Quote Originally Posted by celerystalksme View Post
    print film most of the time. why? because it has greater exposure latitude. and because i can get better prints from them...that's the most important bit because i like putting pictures in frames, physical albums, wallet, car, etc. and also, print film offers some nice 800 and 1600 speed films...even a 3200 b&w film. in addition, most of my subjects or people...and i like print film better for photographing people.

    however...if i know i want to scan them into digital format, i prefer slide film. less grain...and i just seem to get better results when scanning slides.

    Have you had much luck getting the correct skin tones with slide scans? For some reason I noticed that the skin tones look great on the transparency, but when I scan them the skin tones never match.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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