what film would you recommend
what is a good film for landscape i was told ILFORD DELTA 400 PRO is good
any advice welcome
what film is good for a landscape? ...how do you want the landscape to look?
why not go out and buy a range of films, test them and see which one you prefer??
"Its my profession to hijack time" ~ Stephen Frizza.
i dont go out and buy a few as its £7 for developing 24exp
so i thought that some people on here would have an idea of a good brand
and what iso rating would be good
and i want it to be bright and good colour representation
Alright, I'll bite.
First off, welcome to APUG! Second, Ilford only makes B&W film.
Third, for landscape use, you typically want as low speed of film as you can get; the 400 speed film is going to be excessively grainy. Unless that's what you're going for, of course.
Do you want negative film for prints or slide film?
Color negative: try a roll of Kodak Ektar 100.
EDIT: after reading your post again, I think you should just try the Kodak Ektar. It almost has the saturation of a slide film, but is easier to get processed for you, it is new (therefore will be around for a while, and you can learn it), an will give you the smoothest, brightest result of any color neg out there right now. Be sure to give it plenty of exposure.
Color slide: Fuji Velvia (any flavor is fine for your first roll, honestly) or Kodak E100G / E100VS.
Just in case you did want a B&W film, and you want "good" color rendition as it applies to the film detecting various colors as certain shades, then you will have to be a little more specific and tell us what you're looking for. My suggestion for a landscape B&W film would be Delta 100, T-Max 100 or maybe even PanF - but that might be a little tricky for your first roll. Stick with the first two, give generous exposure (maybe rate them at 80 ISO for your first go at this) and develop acording to manufacture time to start.
Then come back and tell us how you did!
Best of luck,
Last edited by Jedidiah Smith; 03-14-2010 at 06:50 AM. Click to view previous post history.
Reason: Second thought
These types of questions always end up with the same kind of answers. You will get more film suggestions than you can find in any one store or mailorder catalog. The real answer is that any good film will give you excellent landscape photographs if properly chosen and processed.
Originally Posted by cyberspider
What is more important than the type of film is the camera format and the film processing. Medium and large-format cameras have the edge over 35mm, because a larger format is less 'sensitive' to the grain issues of faster films. However, faster films are preferred by some landscape photographers for their smoother tones. Consequently, large-format cameras are best for landscape photography, not to mention their adjustment capabilities.
Having said that, most important to me is film and print processing. Leaving this to a lab is an absolute no-no if you aim for peak performance. You must learn to do it yourself or you won't be satisfied with the results. By the way, film processing won't cost you £7 a roll either when you do it yourself.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Couldn't have said it better myself Ralph.
Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht
Not to be disrespectful, but you didn't really help answer the question, either. Yes, I agree with everything you said. But, and this is a strong "but" here: we're trying to HELP new film shooters get shooting! Analog photography is only going to grow if we're willing to share our knowledge with the up and coming photographers who ask, " what's a good film for... "
Larger format is better for most landscape, true. This was posted in the 35mm section. I will take some flak for this, but to the OP: grab that roll of 35mm film, even if all you can get where you live is a "lowly" roll of Gold 100, load that baby in whatever camera it is that you have now, and spend your money on a good day trip or fuel money to get you out in nature on a good hike.
You'll come back with something of more worth, shooting that 35mm, than you would if you sat there waiting and wishing you had money for a 4x5 rig.
OK, End Rant//
Sorry, I thought I did. If not, let me summarize:
Originally Posted by Jedidiah Smith
1. Any name brand film is OK for landscape.
2. Exclude fast films, if you are limited to 35mm.
3. 35mm and landscape is not an ideal combination.
BTW, I appreciate your goal of supporting analog photography, but it will only be recognized for what it is if we at least aim for perfection. Mediocre compromises may be counter-productive if they create more disappointment than satisfaction. We ow it to the OP to show interim containment actions as well as outlining long-term solutions.
I would go with Ektar 100 or Velvia for slides.
Do you prefer peas or corn? Picking a film is a matter of taste.
Delta 400 is a great film to start with especially if you are hand holding or doing low light stuff, makes life a lot easier.
I agree with Stephen Frizza though, you should experiment and play.
I was in Death Valley National Park at Scotty's Castle and loaded a roll of some expired Fuji 800 color negative film for some dark interior shots and finished the roll up with a few broad daylight landscape shots. Surprised me a lot, it is by no means a standard looking "gallery style" shot but the color palette is absolutely gorgeous, the texture is beautiful, and the detail is all I would expect, truly special in my opinion.
"In my opinion" are the three key words there.
You need to taste the various varieties before you will know what tastes best to you.
Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR
"We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin