Which Peint Film To Use

G

Guest

I have seen discussions on the best slide film to use.
What would be the best recomendation for print films in the 100, 200 & 400 speed range that are available in the UK and other countries?
Should you rate them at a different iso rating to improve colour saturation?
Which is better for daylight, and which is better for evening/nighttime?
And any other points.

Here's waiting!

Paul
 
G

Guest

A question for all...
I had been hearing that modern ISO 800 films were very fine grain so I purchased some Kodak Supra 800. I am not so impressed. Even with 3" x 5" prints there is visible grain! The question is what aperture is best for finer grain? More wide open? Or more stopped down? I know for certain that the last roll was shot with medium aperture. Ideas?
Ron in NM
 
G

Guest

> I am sorry for not leaving a more thorough recommendation. I have shot the Fuji NPZ 800 with both a 35 (Contax t3) and a medium format camera (mamiya 7ii) and been extremely pleased with the results. The color is very accurate, even indoor with florescent lighting. With the medium format film, I have enlarged to 8 x 10 and seen no evidence of grain whatsoever. I have enlarged to 5 x 7 with the 35 film and also seen ( to my eye) any evidence of grain. Being satisfied with a film is a very subjective experience. All I can say is that I have been pleased with this film and recommend to anyone who has yet to try it to go out, buy a roll or two, and give it a chance. I think you will be very pleased with the results, especially portrait- whether indoor or indoor.
 
G

Guest

Thanks Ron, the Fuji sounds great, I will try that. Is it a UK available film? Has anybody got a favourite 100 to 400 film?
 
G

Guest

Paul, I've tried many print films over the past several years and have settled on Fuji NPS 160 for general use because it is very sharp and has great colours. When the light gets a bit low, Fuji NPH 400 performs very well in terms of sharpness and grain, except in blue sky areas of an image. I no longer use NPH when I know there'll be some sky in the image. NPH renders a very grainy and murky blue sky, compared to NPS. While travelling, pro films like NPS and NPH may not be readily available, so I then use Fuji Reala 100 and Fuji Superia 200. Both of these films are readily available in consumer outlets, and are very sharp with great colour rendition. Fuji's print films have a unique cyan "fourth colour layer" which allows reproduction of much more natural colours, especially under artificial lighting. Finally, it is very important to consider how well a film can be scanned. The Fuji print films scan very well in my Nikon Coolscan LS-2000. I have tried various Kodak films in the past, but always regretted it. I use Fuji films exclusively now. I should mention that I don't use so much print film these days. I much prefer working with slide film - Fuji Astia 100 and Fuji Provia 400 are the standard films in my bag. I reserve the print films for my point and shoot compact cameras.

I can recommend you to download the spec. sheets for all the pro films from the Fuji web site. They are downloadable as pdf files which you can then print out and study at your leisure. They are very informative.
 
G

Guest

Paul, I like Fuji NPS160 too + a polarizer. I would recommend to give the newer Fuji NPC 160 Prof. at E.I. 100. for punchy colors. My standard films indoors & outdors are Kodak Portra 400NC (not VC!) and for slides the Fuji Provia 400F [RHPIII ?]. Greetings from Switzerland, Rainer Nagel
 
G

Guest

Craig,

what is your experience with fuji provia 400f compared to 100f. do the colours fade out? up to which size the grain and sharpeness is no problem?

dirk
 
G

Guest

Hi Dirk.

With Provia 400F the grain can be noticed at all print sizes, but it isn't objectionable. It's not an ugly grain, like some films, but a smooth, even, and small grain. As for the colour, it looks accurate but it lacks "punch". 400F is a good "documentary" film, but not a "beauty" film, in my opinion.

I use Astia 100 rather than Provia 100F because Astia is better for skin tones. According to the spec. sheet, Astia can reproduce more subtle gradations of tone, and is more tolerant of varying lighting conditions, unlike Provia 100F which I found to be too "honest" in that it exaggerates the blue cast in shaded locations. Astia is more saturated than Provia, and just looks better on the light box to me. Astia slides kind of jump out from the light box and look "beautiful".

I shot some Provia 400F recently, and posted some s&le images on one of my web sites. You can see them at
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The bottom shot of two motor scooters was on Astia 100, the other shots are all on Provia 400F.

Kind regards,

Craig (in Hong Kong)
 
G

Guest

Dear all, I agree with Craig that 400F [RHPIII] has more grain (about like Kodak Elite Chrome 200/Ektachrome E200 Prof.). But 100F has less grain than Kodachrome 25 had and Velvia has. Thats a unique selling position. *=* BUT: I noticed that grain depends on the printing lab/machine!! I would recommend a large lab, original FUJI-LAB for slide printing (they scan and print with much higher resulution than KODAK labs.)

Furthermore those Digiprint(TM of Agfa) labs have hair lines visible on a 20x30cm print by the way. ex&le: they scan the slides and SHARPEN them and more...

regarding ASTIA [RAP]: it does bias white skin tones to "flamingo red/pink" how much it does bias depends on the E6 processing lab, again!

If you really want do a shoot out slide film you must print on Ilfords CIBACRHOME. It is a high-gloss fine-print paper with metallic effect. 2x to 3x as expensive but great.

If outdoors weather is just bullshit (rainy & grey & depressing) If you need more punchy colors you can push develop Provia 400F and expose as E.I 800 ASA w/o any bad grain. Alternative use Kodak E200 Prof. pushed 1 stop and expose E.I. 320 to get the colors :)

Last but not least: I once got grainy & unsharp pictures from Kodak Ektar 25 negatives from a swiss cheapo lab. I complaint about it and the reprinted without grain and sharp as hell. I couldn't believe my eyes! --Rainer ------ Craig writes:

With Provia 400F the grain can be noticed at all print sizes, but it isn't objectionable. It's not an ugly grain, like some films, but a smooth, even, and small grain. As for the colour, it looks accurate but it lacks "punch". 400F is a good "documentary" film, but not a "beauty" film, in my opinion.

I use Astia 100 rather than Provia 100F because Astia is better for skin tones. According to the spec. sheet, Astia can reproduce more subtle gradations of tone, and is more tolerant of varying lighting conditions, unlike Provia 100F which I found to be too "honest" in that it exaggerates the blue cast in shaded locations. Astia is more saturated than Provia, and just looks better on the light box to me. Astia slides kind of jump out from the light box and look "beautiful".

I shot some Provia 400F recently, and posted some s&le images on one of my web sites. You can see them at
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The bottom shot of two motor scooters was on Astia 100, the other shots are all on Provia 400F.

Kind regards,

Craig (in Hong Kong)
 
G

Guest

... in a thread of photo.net there seems to be the opinion that the fuji sensia (newest emulsion) would be equally good to provia 100F but less saturated. is this also your experience?

dirk
 
G

Guest

I haven't seen any of those films you're talking about. I've had incredible results with Fuji Reala (100) print film.

Jeff in Colorado
 
G

Guest

I 've nice results with Kodak Supra 100 and Fuji Superia Xtra 400, these two films are my default.

Hercules in Hong Kong
 
G

Guest

> My default and favourite print film is Kodak Supra 100 and Fuji Superia Xtra 400

Hercules

>
 
G

Guest

I love both Provia 400F and 100F - the 400 behaves exactly like the 100 , same colour characteristics etc , but just faster . A very useful combination , you dont have to think about it , just load and shoot and you'll get similar results . Obviously the 400 will be slightly grainier , but for a 400 its damn fine grain - I've had a magazine cover shot using 400F and it reproduced excellently....... Steve
 
G

Guest

please notice that both Fuji NPS160 Prof. and NPC160 Prof. and all new 4th Layer Fuji superia amateur are updated Versions of good old REALA 100 (state of the art 1995) Main Advantages are: durability, light & dark fading stability (50y+ ?) As far as I know Kodak cannot achieve this in PRINT films yet. checkout "Wilhelm Reasearch" or so Have a good day, Rainer Nagel from Switzerland ... Jeff writes: I haven't seen any of those films you're talking about. I've had incredible results with Fuji Reala (100) print film.

Jeff in Colorado
 
Top