Slides vs Prints

This is probably a personal decision and undoubtedly a very basic question, but

is there any benefit to shooting slide flim over print file (medium format)?

 

I can see that it may be a little cheaper to shoot and process a roll of

slides, but then prints have to be made eventually. Do I gain anything over

using slide film than over print film?

 

I normally shoot in black and white and process my own stuff, but I would like

to experiment with color as well. I am using a Kiev 6C and/or a Richomatic

225 depending on what I am shooting and how much stuff I feel like lugging

around. I shoot mostly landscapes, woods, deer and misc. wildlife (if I can

get them to pose long enough :).

 

 

Thanks

 

- Marshall

You are right, it is a personal issue, but there are some logical reasons to pick either negative or positive film. Negative film has much more exposure latitude than slide film - if your scene has more than a three to four stop exposure difference, then print film will be the better choice. On the other hand, there is nothing more exciting than seeing a well exposed slide on the ligh table - the colors are just stunning. You can make traditional darkroom prints from both films, but prints from slides are more expensive and it is getting harder to find a lab that will do it. If you scan your film, then I would go with slide film - a scanner can be calibrated for slide film, but not for negative film - that does not mean that you cannot scan negative film, but it is not as accurate as with slides (plus with a aslide you kno what the print should look like!) I actually use both types of film - depending on the circumstances.

The biggest thorn in my side is shooting a lake from a cliff overhang in which I can never seem to balance the sky and the surrounding woods. Either one of the other is underexposed or overexposed. (I am no Ansel Adams!) I guess slide film will not be totally forgiving on such shots. (although my experience is black and white - it may not be a big issue with color).

 

Also I suppose if the lab scans the good slides, then I should be able to get an acceptable print.

 

-Marshall

It is true that print film has a wider latitude than slides, but the photo paper the print film is printed on has a narrower dynamic range compare to slides. The only way you can realize the dynamic range of the print film is to scan the film and play with it in PhotoShop before printing, or make custom dark room print (just like B+W).

<...I can never seem to balance the sky and the surrounding woods. Either one of (sic) the other is underexposed or overexposed.> A graduated neutral density filter is the ideal solution. They come in various gradations. I suggest either a 2-stop soft or 3-stop hard for starters. Visit Lee Filters or Singh-Ray.

Printing from slides is not the issue it once was. My local lab uses a Fuji Frontier system that scans and prints digitally. Prints from negs or slides are the same price. The only issue I have is having to use another lab to process my 120 E-6 first.<p>

 

Here's the link for the lab I use <a href="http://photoproimaging.com/">Photo Pro Imaging</a>

<p>

I personally prefer to use slide film for images that don't contain people. I like the color beter.

I like slides. They look especially awesome when projected.

 

The other reason I like slides is because I have an anchor or a base for what the color should look like with the slide.

 

Printing slides today is no hassle at all. Scan them, adjust, and print. They look great.

 

Slide film forces you to be a little less sloppy with your exposure...but, really, what is wrong with that?

If you want prints, shoot neg.

 

Neg films scan just fine and are no harder than black and white. You may have to balance the colors, but I work in TIFF/RGB from the scanners and use no color management in photoshop. Work photoshop as Psd. and then convert to JPEG for final output saving each along the way. I almost never rebalance color unless it something shot in shade or some other light condition other than the sun the film was designed to be used in.

 

Actually slides are harder to scan because of high contrast and exposure must be dead on and even then you loose what is out of the exposure range. You have to learn the scanner software and what buttons to push. That an photoshop learning curves are difficult, far more difficult than a real darkroom which I used for 45 years and still use.

I've always felt that prints from slides looked much better (more contrast, punchier colors, sharper, etc.), than prints from negatives. At least that has been my experience. I scan and print my own now.

Slides are better suited to nature subjects than negatives, which are mostly used for people subjects. In either case the best prints nowadays are done digitally.