Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
what film
-
09-07-2009 2:29pm#1
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
those of you that shoot 35mm film - what do you generally buy and why choose it?
tri-x for B&W mostly, although I mix and match all the time. I like seeing what different B&W films do. At the moment I have a couple of rolls of neopan 1600 to get through to see if they'll do better than delta 3200, and some pan f to try.
Fuji for slide, Provia 400x is a godsend.
Kodak for print film. All the Portras, with a special place in my heart for portra NC shot at about 125 or so. Also Ektar which is rapidly becoming my favouritest film of all time. Portra 800 is probably the best fast colour film, at least for scanning. I've never managed to scan the fast fuji negative films successfully. They turn baddd.Ilford is the best. Fuji shop RIGHT next door to me wont touch it though.
Nothing to do with it being Ilford, they wouldn't be able to develop fuji Neopan either, any proper B&W film. Try some of the C-41 B&W films and they'll be able to develop. Or start developing yourself.0 -
It would be interesting to know why you ask this. I used read a lot of reviews of film brands, just to build up a working knowledge of ISO and help my vocabulary.
Do you have a favourite film? I've had some really nice effects with the free Fuji film I used get when having work processed.
Aha, the inquisitive mind
My last experience with 35mm film was many years ago and only with a P&S film cameras of varying kinds including a really cool Yashica yoke. My first digital P&S (A Kodak 2.1MP something or other) had me hooked and never to process film again. But I bought a 50 lens a while back and it happened to have a Pentax Me Super attached to it 
My curiosity has been steadily increasing and I reckon I should give it a go with the Me Super. I often look back on old pictures and marvel at the dynamic range and rich contrast but I have never shot with a film SLR and now I have one which is more than capable so I am curious, curious, very curious.
But i've just no idea what film I would have used previously so hence I'm interested to see what others use and why they use it.
I want to try both colour and black and white and see how I like the results.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
HP5 400 is really lovely for low contrast stuff, but if you want something with a bit more punch you could try the FP4? The 125 is lovely for portraits if you get the light. I exposed a roll of PanF plus 50 a while ago by accident
Actually, you've just reminded me - gonna bring the film camera and some nice film into a studio shoot I have on Saturday
0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
+1
Takes ages to get it developed but well worth it
I develop it myself it only takes a max of 30 mins, from loading the film in the tank to drying.Ilford is the best. Fuji shop RIGHT next door to me wont touch it though.
You should learn to develop it yourself it's dead easy0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
There is a plug in for photoshop that will give you different film effects, Its Dxo about 80 euro to buy, but a free trial available here if you want to see what different films do!
the plug in is ok, doesnt really represent real film tho... something just cant be replicated digitally with film...0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
anyone used this??
Its suposed to be the worlds finest grain colour film, sooo it should be good for landscapes. Or should i go with velvia 50?
I've used it quite a bit. Tag search for 'ektar' on my flickr stream for some examples. I love it, and its fast replacing slide film for me. It has some of the look of slide, and I can develop it myself for about 1/5th the cost of a roll of slide.
That said, it's hard to beat Velvia ...0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
The thread I started about colour casts in Velvia did not do this slide film justice. In sunny conditions, it is sharp and clear. Those with more experience probably know how to get the best out of it in less than ideal conditions.
[IMG][/img]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3518/3224259515_0ea5796160.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/anouilh/3224259515/
This was desaturated a bit, as far as I can remember, to highlight the structural details.0 -
-
Update:
Well, I shot my first roll of film on a SLR at the weekend (wooo hoooo). I had great plans of picking some of the wild and exotic film mentioned on this thread but when I got to a mini lab store the only thing they had was a 2+1 special of some fuji superia. Time didn't allow for a change of plan so that's what I shot.
My setup was a Pentax Me Super SLR and a lovely manual 50mm f1.7 takumar prime. It was bought originally for the lens and happened to have the body attached. I've never used it as a camera body since buying it (shame on me)
Impressions - well I loved it overall.
It wouldn't have me jettison digital and I doubt if it ever would but is was a whole lot of fun.
I was shooting manual-ish - obviously iso fixed which was at 400, aperture via the aperture ring, manual focus which I found much easier than the same lens on the digital body, and shutter speed determined by the in camera meter.
So picked up developed images today -
Firstly - I was so impressed that anything at all turned out. I had visions of being told that nothing was on the film
I didn't get a wow factor off the images but that's ok - my expectations weren't that high.
About 50-60% turned out quite ok and reasonably respectable but it has shown me some basic flaws in my photography that I can work on correcting. This is good.
The results varied from deep and rich colour to washed out bright images.
The rich deep colours are quite beautiful and aesthetically pleasing.
I'm wondering about the washed out shots. Very little in terms of contrast and saturation. I'm suspecting it was bordering on overexposure but I followed the metering on the camera and at no stage did it tell me it was bordering on overexposure. Perhaps it lied or perhaps i'm stoopid
I hadn't used any exposure compensation which was an option on the camera so perhaps I need to pay more attention to bright scenes and learn when to ignore the internal meter.
At the other end of the scale, I have noticed that the images with the rich and deep colour also has some wonderful strong contrast but as a result the eyes of some of the subjects are more black than blue so it looks a little like one big pupil - not in a freakish way but if looking for it then you'd know.
All in all, it was great fun, I enjoyed the irony of my 12 year old daughter walking around with about a grand worth of DSLR on her neck while I sported a €40 dinosaur. I need to work on my understanding of the film and the camera to reduce the instances of the washed out look and the overly saturated and contrasty images. I think overall it will improve my photography understanding, correct some flaws with the basics which i'm naturally correcting on digital pp rather than in camera, and hopefully I'll get some nice images along the way.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
Update:
Well, I shot my first roll of film on a SLR at the weekend (wooo hoooo). I had great plans of picking some of the wild and exotic film mentioned on this thread but when I got to a mini lab store the only thing they had was a 2+1 special of some fuji superia. Time didn't allow for a change of plan so that's what I shot.
My setup was a Pentax Me Super SLR and a lovely manual 50mm f1.7 takumar prime. It was bought originally for the lens and happened to have the body attached. I've never used it as a camera body since buying it (shame on me)
Impressions - well I loved it overall.
It wouldn't have me jettison digital and I doubt if it ever would but is was a whole lot of fun.
I was shooting manual-ish - obviously iso fixed which was at 400, aperture via the aperture ring, manual focus which I found much easier than the same lens on the digital body, and shutter speed determined by the in camera meter.
So picked up developed images today -
Firstly - I was so impressed that anything at all turned out. I had visions of being told that nothing was on the film
I didn't get a wow factor off the images but that's ok - my expectations weren't that high.
About 50-60% turned out quite ok and reasonably respectable but it has shown me some basic flaws in my photography that I can work on correcting. This is good.
The results varied from deep and rich colour to washed out bright images.
The rich deep colours are quite beautiful and aesthetically pleasing.
I'm wondering about the washed out shots. Very little in terms of contrast and saturation. I'm suspecting it was bordering on overexposure but I followed the metering on the camera and at no stage did it tell me it was bordering on overexposure. Perhaps it lied or perhaps i'm stoopid
I hadn't used any exposure compensation which was an option on the camera so perhaps I need to pay more attention to bright scenes and learn when to ignore the internal meter.
At the other end of the scale, I have noticed that the images with the rich and deep colour also has some wonderful strong contrast but as a result the eyes of some of the subjects are more black than blue so it looks a little like one big pupil - not in a freakish way but if looking for it then you'd know.
All in all, it was great fun, I enjoyed the irony of my 12 year old daughter walking around with about a grand worth of DSLR on her neck while I sported a €40 dinosaur. I need to work on my understanding of the film and the camera to reduce the instances of the washed out look and the overly saturated and contrasty images. I think overall it will improve my photography understanding, correct some flaws with the basics which i'm naturally correcting on digital pp rather than in camera, and hopefully I'll get some nice images along the way.
Older film slrs had a center weighted exposure which can get fooled by subjects that have a huge variation in light levels
My minolta 7000 has a center weighted meter and in some situations, that has a strong difference in light levels you have to use the AEL lock and meter for the midtones to get a correct exposure.
You could also test the light meter against your digital slr to determin how accurate it is.
That said, its fairly hard to over expose colour negative film, it has a huge exposure latitude compared to digital sensors.0
Advertisement