Film Technical Information

[Guest]

I have been putting the Contax T3 through its paces with Velvia for the past 6 months. I now would like to photograph low-lit street scenes and interiors without flash, using high speed transparency film. I would also like maximum grain. So if anyone has any ideas on films, ratings and processing, I would appreciate it.

I would also like to use Agfa's Scala film. I believe there are two ISO options with this film. How can I select one ot the other using the Contax T3 (there doesnt seem to be a manual ISO settings button).

Thank you for any help with the two queries.

Best regards

Greg

 

[Guest]

Hi Greg.

I do not have an answer for the first question. I never shot faster than iso 100, but I will try this in the furure.

For the second question (Contax T3 Iso setting):

The T3 does not have a separate Iso setting. You have to modify the Iso by setting under/overexposure in 1/2 or 1/3 stops. This you can costumize in the costum functions. It saves the information even if you turn the camera off.

 

[Guest]

Hi.
Available in UK, and I would assume in other countries are self applied DX labels. Maybe you could label one batch for one ISO, and leave another as the alternate ISO???

 

[Guest]

Greg,

A little bit late off course but regarding the Scala question:
Scala can be used at 100/200/400/800/1600 ISO.
I have used at at 100/1600 and it is a marvel. 100 ISO gives you very sharp results. 1600 ISO gives raw grains that you would like to see (especially when underexposed 0.5 EV).

I can recommend it.

 

[ssp65]

Can anyone help with the issue of slide film development? I am aware of the problems of having colour negative film developed and printed at minilabs, but does the same apply to having slide film developed at minilabs? Is there a difference between having slide film developed at minilabs compared to pro labs. Thanks for any advice.

Steve

 

[kaare]

[One problem you have to be aware of is, that some minilabs develop only few slide films. So chemicals are not always "fresh" with the correct PH, density etc. etc. Pro labs develop slide film every day, so everthing here is usually fine tuned for optimum results]

 

[krat]

I believe that most minilabs send slide film somewhere else for development, so there is a 1 or 2 day turn-around and more chance of losing the film.

The pro lab I use for slides has a 3 hour turn-around time, only costs about half a US dollar more than the local photo shop, and is in the Kodak Q-Lab program (they send s&les of their chemistry to Kodak periodically for checking). I've also had far fewer scratches. Luckily it's only 15 minutes from where I work.

Gary

 

[jeff]

Slide film developing can vary prolab to prolab.Find one you like and stick with it. I use a lot of Kodak and take it to a lab that indicates it's a Kodak Q lab. They're supposed to be certified by Kodak to have high qualiy. So any slide film you take should be handle properly. Should be. I'm not sure if the Q lab thing is worldwide or North American. Jeff

 

[jhslater]

Most "mini-labs" are not equiped to process slide film. they just do C41 negative color. Some camera shops might have E-6 available if they have professional customers. My experience is that you should find a lab that deals with pros and that has Kodak's blessing as an E-6 lab. There are problems that can occur with E-6 if the lab does not follow Kodak's quality control proceedures. I went to E-6 class at a Kodak training center when the process was first introduced. Some small labs do not do well with E-6 because they don't have their technicians trained. Hope this helps.

Jim

 

[swoolf]

I'm not sure if the Q lab thing is worldwide or > North American.

Some labs here in South Africa are Q lab rated , so it must be worldwide . I believe Fuji have a similar program for some of their Pro labs too , but not sure what its called or how it might work . Steve >

 

[ssp65]

Thanks everyone for the advice.

Steve

 

[albert4321]

For me, Q lab or not, I use pro labs because they can push and pull my films, and offer snip test.

 

[chenly]

Does no one develop their own film anymore? Jobo CPP-2 with Tetenal six-bath E6 works perfectly every time?

 

[chenly]

BTW, Kodak can KMA. They're sure they're doing god's (lowercase intentinal) work on earth, but, by and large, they're FOS. Any yayhoo can process color slides with Fuji, Beleler, or, in my case, Tetenal chemical. Process control is what counts, not a brand name.

P.S.: I am a lab technician in addition to running my own E6/Ilfochrome (and B&W!) darkroom.

 

[jhslater]

Chris,

You are right - anyone can process color slides IF they maintain the process controls. I did my first roll of slides in the mid 50s with Ansco film and chemicals. I just made sure I followed the instructions and kept the temperatures as close as possible. I remember after all these years how ecited I was when a pulled those slide out of the tank.

Back then, you had to expose the film to a flood l& (the reversal exposure). I even used sunlight once because my 500 watt l& burned out when I needed it. I have also done E2, E3, E4 and E6. But nowdays I don't think I would have the time to do it.

Kodak has always had the idea that they were the gods of photography, and the consumers believed in them - until Fuji came to the USA. (And Ilford for B&W.) However, their tech support was excellent back in the 70s & 80s. I think they were feeling the breath of Fuji on their neck and realized they had to keep up the service or loose market share.

I enjoyed my years as a lab manager and technician, but would not want to deal with Kodak today.

BTW, have you noticed that the darkroom departments of most camera shops seems to be limited to one small set of shelves with only a few products available to the consumer. What has happened to this part of photography?

Jim

 

[coodeville]

I think the lack of darkroom supply shows the wave of the future. Digital is becoming huge. I myself am eyeing up the S2.

 

[rico]

Jim, K Michael,

Chemical-based photography is under digital assault for sure. As an amateur for 30 years, I've tray-developed color prints, developed Cibachrome in tanks, developed B&W emulsions, and bulk-loaded film by hand. So, the slow demise of these processes is painful to watch.

That said, I credit digital for reviving my interest in shooting. when I purchased a Nikon CP900 a few years ago. It was amazing to see what 1.3 megapixels from a P&S could do -- instant feedback, too! I now have a DSLR (Canon D30) which gives vastly superior images and responsiveness. Am now exploring an inkjet printer (Canon S9000 or Epson 2200).

The odd thing is my recent return to film-based photography, and not just for nostalgia. Sometimes the digital gimmicks and battery dependency gets in the way of the craft, and the vision. For my analog enjoyment, I can now grab the RTSIII, toss in some film, and go full manual.

While I'm not ready to buy an enlarger, I intend to dig out my tank and develop film again. If the chemical bug really hits, I might dip my toe into LF, and try some Pt contact printing.

 

[ssp65]

I had an 8 x 12 enlargement made from a slide last week and when I got it back the print showed very dull colours, an overall darkness and the sky portion of the print had a purple colour cast instead of the rich blue as on the slide. Velvia was the film used. Now I know the photo shop has made a mess of this, but I would like to know what has happened from a technical perspective. A friend has stated that when making prints from slides "nothing can really go wrong". Clearly I dont believe this. So, if anyone has any technical information to share, I am eager to learn. Thanks.

Steve

 

[yogi]

It depends on the processor you take it to for printing. If they are a traditional film processor or they use the newer machines that scan the images in and prints it digitally. I've had work done the traditional way and the new COSTCO method

really inexpensive, but colors can come out wrong. Even traditional printing methods can have variances due to age of chemical, type of paper used etc... but they are typically more acceptable. The COSTCO digital prints from slides are also good, but sometimes they have the machines adjusted to be very warm toned. This makes my pictures of black sand beaches turn into brown muddy beaches. Just ask them to redo without any color correction or adjustments and things come out much much better.

Another difference, our local COSTCO's and Kits camera's use the same machines, but the way they have them setup, the COSTCO machines do not handle magenta color very well. Nor do they handle the dark purple of the purple Iris flowers too well. But Kits camera does much better but at over twice the cost per print

Select a good local developer/printer and stick with them. And don't be afraid to let them know how YOU like it or have them redo the print. most places will redo a print for free.

 

[rondo]

I have never had good prints from slides at any usual processor. Then I found out about Type R enlarging. The slide will come out beautifully with this process, even out to 18" x 24". It is a lot more expensive though. But if your enlargement is for fine art-it is worth it. You could even pay a little more and request some creative dodging and burning. Do an on-line search for The Slideprinter!

Ron in NM