lawrence___3 Posted April 3, 1997 Share Posted April 3, 1997 Would anyone care to elaborate a little bit about what kind of films is best for nature photography? What are the benefits and trade offs? This could be an interesting article for photo.net don't you think? L. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_atkins Posted April 3, 1997 Share Posted April 3, 1997 I carry three different films. <ul> <li>Velvia for when I want saturated colors, high sharpness and when thelight is good enough for ISO 50 (or 40) speed. <li>Fujichrome Sensia 100. A perfectly fine, sharp film, cheaper than Ektachome and just as good (in my opinion). <li>Kodachrome 200 for when the light gets low or I actually want a slightly "grainy" look. </ul> If I want to I can push Sensia 100 to 200 or 400, or I can push Kodachrome to 500. That about covers everything I'm ever likely to (reasonably) want. If I need a faster film, I'll consider using Fuji 800 print film, which gives better images than any ISO 800 slide film or any slide film pushed to ISO 800. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
don_atzberger Posted April 4, 1997 Share Posted April 4, 1997 The films Bob mentioned are outstanding. There are two more emulsions I'd like to add to that list. The new Ektachrome E100S and E100SW are both excellent. Of the two, the SW seems a little better for nature shots because of its warmer bias. However, on the few Photo-CD scans I've had done with these films, the E100S seemed to fare better. Remember, however, that this observation comes from a very small sample. The E100SW might scan fine for other shots. <p> Ektachrome Elite II 100 is the consumer version of these films. The color balance seems somewhere between E100S and E100SW. <p> Kodak Ektapress Multi-speed is also promising for times when you need something faster than EI-500. This can be shot up to EI-1000 and I've gotten some decent results at EI-1250 and EI-1600. I've only shot a couple rolls of this stuff, but so far it seems very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duane_galensky Posted April 5, 1997 Share Posted April 5, 1997 Now, I only carry E100SW. If I need faster film, I push it a stop. I found that inventorying a variety of films is problematic for me: I never have enough of what I need, and too much of something else. With one stock, I can just reach in the bag and load the camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_smith Posted April 5, 1997 Share Posted April 5, 1997 How about a different perspective. Try Kodak T-Max 100 for both your 4x5 & 5x7 shooting. With the long exposures in the magic light when the sun is below the horizon and you have the all encompassing light that is soft & even, it can't be beat. With the exposure times running into the 2-10 minute range, it is faster than any 400 speed film on the market due to its reciprocity characteristics. When you combine that with its great ability to be manipulated during processing, its ability to capture the shadow detail and it sharpness you have a very good film for that natural scene. No matter the old Tri-x, this film has enhanced the abilities of the view camera due to its quality and ability to interpret the low light scenes. It does need someone with the ability to visialize. A shooter with vision and talent. But if you get the pair together, you have a combination that is excellent. Look at John Sexton and you get the idea. So, in trying B&W, give this film a go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_kolwicz Posted April 9, 1997 Share Posted April 9, 1997 First choice for most stuff - Kodachrome 25 although it often happens that I need fast development these days, then I use: E100S/SW. For drab subjects and/or light - first choice Velvia (Never in great light!) I hate the way Velvia and clones look with beautiful light. For B&W - T-Max 100, shot at ISO 50 to get it into the center of its exposure latitude range. I have used Agfa 25 B&W and it was OK, too. END OF LIST. No 200 films, no 400 films, I rarely push e-6 or B&W films. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_atkins Posted April 9, 1997 Share Posted April 9, 1997 Recently I picked out maybe 100 or so of what I considered to be my "best" slides. These were picked from a total of several thousand slides. When I shoot, I'd say I maybe use 80% ISO 100 film (Sensia 100 these days), 10% Kodachrome 200 and 10% slower film (mostly Velvia, with a couple of rolls of K25 or K64 thrown in). <p> After chosing the slides I noticed that way more than 10 % of the final cut were taken on Kodachrome (mostly K200, but some K64). I didn't do an actual count, but probably at least 30 out of the 100 were on Kodachrome (mostly K200). I guess I must really like Kodachrome, or I tend to use it under conditions that give me better images (not in bright sunlight, in fact often in the rain!). I was suprised. I guess I should shoot more K200! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernd_fuhrmann Posted April 14, 1997 Share Posted April 14, 1997 All is very interesting. I use all the same films Many regards B. Fuhrmann Please look the homepage: http://www.gdt.rhein-zeitung.de !!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanjoy___ Posted June 23, 1997 Share Posted June 23, 1997 I too use Sensia RD100 on a regular basis; its highly saturated, very tight grain and FAR cheaper than its professional siblings. Have also recently used a few rolls of Ektachrome 100SW; was very impressed with what I saw, AND it pushes slightly better than Sensia (but at more than twice the price). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now