Fuji stops black and white... :(

A bigger concern to me is will slide film continue. I hope Kodak Ektachrome becomes a reality. Hopefully Velvia will continue. While I hate to lose any film at least we have more then one source of black and white film.

Please...5% above WHAT? That's what makes the much-touted 5% meaningful--or not

 

Actually what makes the figure meaningful is the availability of the film.

A bigger concern to me is will slide film continue. I hope Kodak Ektachrome becomes a reality. Hopefully Velvia will continue. While I hate to lose any film at least we have more then one source of black and white film.

Ektachrome is likely to arrive. If Fuji's gonna kill off their E-6 films, then it will be even more likely. But what's the point of slides nowadays? They get scanned and digitalized, right? And if one wants punchy colors, they go for Ektar which is C-41, much less hassle and lower price than E-6.

Ektachrome is likely to arrive. If Fuji's gonna kill off their E-6 films, then it will be even more likely. But what's the point of slides nowadays? They get scanned and digitalized, right? And if one wants punchy colors, they go for Ektar which is C-41, much less hassle and lower price than E-6.

 

Aside from the fact that I'm one of those weirdos who does still project slides sometimes, I see them as having another benefit. Specifically, when scanning, there's the "what you see is what you get" aspect of them.

 

I will be REALLY upset if Velvia goes away...I don't know if the 100 rolls of 35mm and 50 rolls of 120 I've bought in the past few months will make much of a dent, but at least I'm trying. All I know is that my local lab has been VERY happy with the amount of E6 I've brought them.

 

Everything I've read indicates that Kodak is going for what is more or less an E100G replacement. I shot a decent amount of it back in the day, and it's a nice and fine grained but very "sterile" film. I've often called it "the most digital-like film I've ever used." I wish that they'd bring back E100GX, which was the "warm" version of E100G and looked more natural to my eyes. I doubt that demand will allow them to make both, at least initially, which probably means that I'll go straight for an 81C instead of either no filter or an 81A.

Aside from the fact that I'm one of those weirdos who does still project slides sometimes, I see them as having another benefit. Specifically, when scanning, there's the "what you see is what you get" aspect of them.

 

I will be REALLY upset if Velvia goes away...I don't know if the 100 rolls of 35mm and 50 rolls of 120 I've bought in the past few months will make much of a dent, but at least I'm trying. All I know is that my local lab has been VERY happy with the amount of E6 I've brought them.

 

Everything I've read indicates that Kodak is going for what is more or less an E100G replacement. I shot a decent amount of it back in the day, and it's a nice and fine grained but very "sterile" film. I've often called it "the most digital-like film I've ever used." I wish that they'd bring back E100GX, which was the "warm" version of E100G and looked more natural to my eyes. I doubt that demand will allow them to make both, at least initially, which probably means that I'll go straight for an 81C instead of either no filter or an 81A.

I also like to project slides. It is a different experience than other methods of enjoying photography,

Slides consistently give me accurate renditions of colors and tones as my eyes and mind record them.

When I compare them to prints they remain accurate for much longer periods of time. I also think they are remarkably compatible with digitization.

James Bryant - indeed

 

I also still shoot slides

 

Projecting gives incredible joy to all and the best way to appreciate them

 

Scanning is quite a problem sometimes, but nowadays you can use Nikon ES-1 (or similar) to re-shoot them and the results are better

Hope that Nikon will release soon the new one - ES-2, which is still not on the market

 

My major concern is developing, as already for 10 years the machines here are dead and they do it with jobo's and the results are not very consistent

 

But maybe he best feeling is that you make something completed, final, incredibly looking, and etc.... and it also brings me the feeling of a document - something that recently is quite disgraced of the today's photography

 

As for Ektachrome - my favourite was the VS one, but let's wee what Kodak will bring back

As for Ektachrome - my favourite was the VS one, but let's wee what Kodak will bring back

 

I was never particularly fond of VS-it did what it was advertised(vivid, saturated colors) but it was still plagued with the "Ektachrome blues." I much prefer the "Fujichrome Greens" of Velvia, along with the subtle yellow warming that the original, recreated 50, and 100(but not 100F) have.

 

In all honesty, I liked(and still like) Elite Chrome as a good all around transparency film with no particular bias. In all honesty, to me a "perfect" slide film would be something with the grain and smoothness of E100G along with the color rendition of Elite Chrome. We ALMOST have that in Provia :) (RDPIII) but there again it has the Fuji green bias. I actually have quite a lot of Elite Chrome still frozen, but as I've watched its color shift over the past 10+ years, I tend to grab fresh Provia instead when I need just a good general purpose slide film.

The Fuji transparency I miss the most is Astia--I always found the color rendition to be the most accurate of any slide film that I ever used. This is obviously subjective, but the painters whose work I photographed liked the slides I shot with it.

I still have a ton of E-6 films in my film freezer. I also still use my projector and really love how 6x6 slides look when projected.

 

What Im more worried about, more than will fuji continue to make film, is that if I buy even more than the film i currently have is whether I will be able to get the chemicals to develop them as I do it myself. Im not sure that the chems will have the lifespan that frozen film will have. could turn out to be like a lot of people who had kodachrome film after the last way to develop them was stopped.

The Fuji transparency I miss the most is Astia--I always found the color rendition to be the most accurate of any slide film that I ever used.

 

When I first took an interest in photography, I tried a LOT of films that I figured had a limited time left(this was ~2005) but Astia was one of those that I never got around to trying. I regret not doing that. My local camera store didn't stock it, and at the time as a high school and college student I pretty much was stuck buying one roll at a time and didn't have the money to bulk order like I do now.

 

I check for some on Ebay occasionally, but never see any that I feel good about paying the price being asked.

 

Perhaps I should post a WTB here :)

Black and white films are easier to make, and so I expect easier to get a production line running, or keep one running.

 

Connecting prices to film isn't so obvious, though.

 

Most recently, I bought T-Max P3200, Delta 3200, and Portra 160, one roll each.

(I can always go back and buy more.)

 

But I remember specifically noticing that the Portra 160 was the cheapest of the three.

Look how many films we used to have... and options...

 

I remember shooting a lot of Sensia at the beginning... it was also a nice film

 

Provia is kind of neutral as colors

Black and white films are easier to make, and so I expect easier to get a production line running, or keep one running.

 

Connecting prices to film isn't so obvious, though.

 

Most recently, I bought T-Max P3200, Delta 3200, and Portra 160, one roll each.

(I can always go back and buy more.)

 

But I remember specifically noticing that the Portra 160 was the cheapest of the three.

I would speculate that both BW films are more "specific" ones, with high sensitivity, non-traditional grain and a bit whimsical while developing. If anyone need anything with high sensitivity, pushable and pullable, they will certainly pay 10+ dollars for either Delta or P3200 (although Kodak is a bit cheaper to my bliss).

 

As for Portra 160, I'm a bit confused as well, it sells for 6.5-7.5$ while Portra 400 goes for around 8$.

Look how many films we used to have... and options...

 

I remember shooting a lot of Sensia at the beginning... it was also a nice film

 

Provia is kind of neutral as colors

The only Pro level negs from Fuji that I know of are Pro 160 series and Pro 400H series. I've never used 160 and considering current prices, I don't think I ever will. On the other hand, I used Pro 400H, it's not a bad film, but in my opinion it does nothing that would justify 10$ price tag and would make me choose it over Portra 400.

 

The rest of C-41 from Fuji were quite frankly cheap consumer films.

If you were still shooting weddings or high volumes of portraits on film, NPS(or was it NPC or NPH?-I can't keep them straight) had one advantage LAST YEAR in that it was the last 220 film produced.

 

Fuji pulled the plug on their last remaining 220 films last March(2017) or so I think.

C-41, much less hassle and lower price than E-6.

 

Maybe it's me, but C41 is a lot more hassle to get right in scanning than E6. The only positive I see for C41 in a "hybrid workflow" (=scanning) is price indeed.

 

I don't do a lot of colour work, but still have some Agfa Precisa CT100 left, and a chain store that still offers E6 development at very reasonable prices. The downside is now that I've understood this Agfa film to be re-branded second-pick Fuji.... so if that also goes away, that would be a pity. It's a lot cheaper than the Fuji E6 films here.

 

I've got some Acros 100 in 120 and 35mm, and with this bad news, will stock some more. I quite like it even if I'm quite sure I've not yet hit the sweet spot with my development.

Maybe it's me, but C41 is a lot more hassle to get right in scanning than E6.

 

Never bothered me before, with a proper scanner.

I've got a proper scanner and know how to use it; but E6 doesn't require the correction for the orange mask like C41 does.

IF you use Vuescan and are scanning older Kodak emulsions, C-41 is a snap to get right assuming the negatives haven't color shifted. Unfortunately, with newer stuff like Ektar and the current Portra films you can either hope to find a profile that's close enough(which there's not really one-Portra 160, for example, is not like 160NC or 160VC) or use a generic profile and tweak it.

 

Like I said, with slide films you have an absolute color reference for what it looks like. In Nikon Scan, I can just hit auto curves and auto levels and end up with a scan that's pretty much dead on. That's true even with notoriously difficult films like Velvia. Epson Scan needs a bit more tweaking, but it still does well.

I have an old Minolta DiMAGE scanner and I seldom alter anything if the exposure in the camera was correct. They just look like the scene I remember.

I'm using VueScan, with cheap Kodak ColorPlus 200, for which there is no profile. Safest way is to get decent colours (as far as this emulsion allows, it isn't great stuff to start with) is scanning a unexposed part, and lock exposure and next lock base colour. That gives consistent results. So the problem is not getting results. The point was that E6 is just simpler to get good results, in my view.

I..... Safest way is to get decent colours (as far as this emulsion allows, it isn't great stuff to start with) is scanning a unexposed part, and lock exposure and next lock base colour. That gives consistent results. So the problem is not getting results. The point was that E6 is just simpler to get good results, in my view.

 

this is exactly what I do and my results from c41 are great.

Mhm. That's called "removing orange mask" or something. After that, things are easy so no need for me to pay triple price for film and developing.

Maybe it's me, but C41 is a lot more hassle to get right in scanning than E6. The only positive I see for C41 in a "hybrid workflow" (=scanning) is price indeed.

(snip)

 

The low gamma of C41 films, which is also the reason for more exposure latitude, makes them harder to print, in both exposure and color balance.

 

The traditional way to color balance was to balance for the average over the whole negative. (Put a diffusion filter over the lens, and a color meter underneath.)

 

I suspect that it is easy for scanning software to do something similar. If the software doesn't, and you do it manually, it might be harder.

 

E6 films have tighter color tolerance, as you can't adjust in printing (if you view with a projector).