Marc William's film choice

Discussion in 'Wedding and Event' started by mary_mchenry, Mar 11, 2004.

  1. I absolutely loved Marc William's wedding photographs and am curious about his
    choice of films. The color is beautiful- I am starting to shoot weddings and have
    most of my experience in black and white. Any suggestions for me? Do you (or
    anyone else out there) have thoughts on pushing/pulling color film for weddings?
    Thanks a lot! Mary
  2. IIRC, Marc only shoots C-41 B&W, then scans the negs. Which type of film, I'm not 100% certain. His recent color work is all digital - EOS 1Ds and various MF digital backs.
  3. Thanks for the info... I guess digital got me again! I like using Fuji Superia but am
    interested to know if there is a noticable different between this more economical film
    and the NPH, NPZ. Also, I'm reading that a lot of wedding photographers are
    overexposing (rating 400 ISO film at 250 or 320) and wonder what difference this
    makes. Thanks.
  4. James G. Dainis

    James G. Dainis Moderator

    Most wedding photographers don´t use consumer films because of the lack of consistancy one usually finds with consumer films. NPH 400 and NPS 160 give very accurate flesh tones. Rating a 400 speed film at 320 gives slightly better saturation and also allows for exposure errors. Most films have a greater latitude for overexposure than underexposure. Good results also depend on the lab that you are using. If it is Fuji based, use Fuji films. If it is Kodak based, use Kodak films - Portra NC or UC 400.
  5. RE: overexposing

    Mary, rating an ISO 400 film at 320 or 250 is almost standard procedure for shooting negatives, both color and B&W.

    It is a case of CYA, something of great, great interest and importance to wedding photographers!: Within reason, an "overexposed" negative can yield a very good print whereas an underexposed negative is a disaster. The lower rating gives you an automatic fudge factor toward over and away from underexposure.

    It is technique particularly suited to color since modern color negative films exhibit finer grain (unlike B&W) and better color saturation when "overexposed."

    I use the " marks since many would say rating negative film 1/3 or 2/3 stop lower yields "proper" rather than "over" exposure.

    I am one of those many.
  6. Hi all, I was off in sunny LA shooting a TV commercial on location all week. ( well, not shooting it actually, but watching a crew shoot it for my ad agency). So, sorry for the late response. If you are referring to shots on my web site, 50% of those are on film. The color film tended to be Kodak Portra 160NC or 400NC. The B&W work is 70% T-max 400 CN and the remainder using Tri-X. The C-41 B&W films all scan very nicely and have become my preferred film. I now use mostly digital for color work. But mostly for the speed and convenience / cost factors. I still like the look of film and in fact, my next wedding is an all film one at the request of the couple. My current web site is completely dated and is in process of being completely redone with a new, simpler design and 70% of the shots to be replaced... which means most of the color will be digital.
  7. Beautiful!

Share This Page