What film should I buy and where can I get quality prints?

<p>In the past I have experimented with B&W photography and have processed my own film and developed my own prints, but I no longer have the resources to do so. I wouldn't mind experimenting with digital photography (I've had my eyes on the Nikon D90 for awhile now), but as a student I don't have the 500 dollars or so to drop on a new camera. My little point and shoot is just not keeping me happy with all of its automatic settings and leaves little room for creativity! In the meantime, I would like to continue to enjoy my photography, but am not sure A) what kind of film to purchase or B) a good lab that would produce quality prints for a reasonable price. <br>

What kind of film should I load into my old Pentax ZX-M? I have always played with B&W, but would also like to try some color film. I am from the St. Louis area, so unless the lab is mail order, labs specific to that region suit me nicely.<br>

Thanks in advance for any helpful responses!</p>

<p>Hello- For color negative film try some Kodak Portra or Ektar.....Swan Photo lab has a great service at a great price. You can contact them to get mailers. <a href="http://www.swanphotolabs.com/swan08/">http://www.swanphotolabs.com/swan08/</a> </p>

Yeah, I'll give another vote for Kodak Ektar 100. It's kind of finicky about exposure (don't underexpose it!), but the colors are awesome. It has a completely unique look to it that I've never seen before with any other film, or digital for that matter.

 

Here are some pictures I've taken with Ektar:

 

 

Some "consumer" films are really good too. I like Kodak Gold 200. It has a really nice warm tone to it, which is great for fall landscape photos and pictures of people.

Fuji Reala has nice colors and wide exposure latitude. Fuji Pro 160S or 400H has lower contrast and nice skin tones. For lab processing of B&W, a chromogenic film like Kodak BW400CN or Ilford XP2 may be a safer choice than a traditional B&W film.

<p>For color pictures, I like FUJI color film in ISO speeds 100, 200, 400, and 800. You select the ISO speed based on your estimation of how much light will be available and/or how fast the subject will be moving. For example, if you will be outside taking pics on a sunny day, ISO speed 100 is a good choice. If its cloudy, or in the shade w/o using flash, then ISO 200 is good. For indoor pics with or without Flash, then ISO 400 is good. And when the light gets really low or for flash pics after dark, then ISO 800 is good. These are guidelines, not hard and fast rules. But I like FUJI color film because its still pretty common and readily available from popular outlets like Walmart, Target, Wolf Camera, and Rite Aid. When you buy film, ALWAYS check the box for the stamped expiration date, and only buy film that's well within the expiration date. Keep the film in the fridge untill you need to use it, and then pull out a container and let it sit a while at room temp before loading it in your camera. I also like FUJI color film because it seems to give me pretty good color values in my final prints.</p>

<p>I take my 35mm Fuji color film to RITE AID pharmacy for processing. But I do NOT use their in-house processing machine or people. Instead, I ask the clerk to give me a FUJI LAB envelope and put the film in that. A driver shows up a couple time a week to take the FUJI LAB processing orders to a regional FUJI LAB for processing. The FUJI LAB color prints are returned to RITE AID a couple days later and then I pick them up. When I fill out the FUJI LAB envelope, I also request a Picture CD which results in a JPEG copy of each picture being put on the CD. I usually get a single set of 4x6 color prints on GLOSSY photo paper, and the Picture CD is placed in a nice leatherette carrying case. The regular price for this is about $10 for 24 pictures and a Picture CD. Sometimes Rite Aid runs a special on Fuji Lab Processing and you can get pictures and CD for about $8. So it pays to stop and check the Rite Aid sales papers when you first walk in, to see if Rite Aid is offering a Fuji Lab Processing special that week.</p>

<p>I find this approach is reasonable, gives me good quality color prints, gives me a set of JPEGS on a Picture CD (which saves me from having to scan the images myself at a later date), and costs $8-$10 per roll. I feel that the staff at the Fuji Lab Processing site are probably better trained and more consistent in quality.</p>

<p>You can also use this approach with Black & White film, by using KODAK ISO 400 BW film, available at Walmart. Look for the package that says its compatible with standard color processing procedure. You can still shoot black & white with this film and use the Fuji Lab Process (explained above) and let them process and print the roll to B & W pictures and a Picture CD of b & w images.</p>

<p>Also, as pointed out in <a href="http://www.photo.net/black-and-white-photo-film-processing-forum/005TES">an earlier discussion</a>, "most labs will make a mess of any conventional b&w film." I had a similar experience with Ilford Delta 400.</p> <p><a href="http://www.rogerandfrances.com/blackwhite.html">Roger Hicks</a> suggests that the best traditional B&W film for lab processing is "probably something like Ilford FP4 Plus or Kodak Plus-X Pan, because they can stand terrible abuse at the development stage."</p>

<p>For b&w I have switched back to tri-x in all formats. They redid it a few years ago and it is far better than it was, and it was a very good film. My only reservation would be if I needed 20x24 from 35mm (wrong format for that size with any film). The 8x10 prints I am getting from 35mm are very impressive and would have been impossible with a fast film 10 years ago.</p>

<p>I actually just finished scanning and printing some Ektar. <a href="http://www.andylynn.net/files/foodfight-2.jpg">You can see an example here</a> . (That's with my Minolta Dual III - no dust removal.) I love the color and fine grain, makes my 30 year old Minolta and my Vivitar lens look like an FX DSLR.</p>

<p>My other favorite Kodak print film is the Portra 400VC. <a href="../classic-cameras-forum/00V9N4">The color is fantastic</a> but not as whacked out as Ektar. Ektar isn't really for photos of people, it's for photos of places and things. Portra films are for photos of people as well as places and things.</p>

<p>For high ISO, the Fuji Superia is pretty good stuff. <a href="http://www.andylynn.net/files/A126237_001A.jpg">Here's a minilab scan</a> of a night shot with Superia 800 and <a href="http://www.andylynn.net/files/A126237_012A.jpg">here's one</a> taken in bright light and overexposed a stop.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>as a student I don't have the 500 dollars or so to drop on a new camera. My little point and shoot is just not keeping me happy with all of its automatic settings and leaves little room for creativity!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The advice to follow places a heavy emphasis on satisfying the cost constraint. Buy a used Canon digital P&S for the price of a few cups of fancy coffee drinks, and then <a href="http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK">go download the CHDK camera upgrade software</a> .</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>In the meantime, I would like to continue to enjoy my photography, but am not sure A) what kind of film to purchase or B) a good lab that would produce quality prints for a reasonable price.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Again, the advice to follow places a heavy emphasis on satisfying the cost constraint: <em>don't </em> bother with film.</p>

<p>Having a drug store or big box print your film guarantees unsatisfying prints. It won't matter what film you use or how it's exposed, the result is the same high contrast, automatic mini-lab adjusted output. Expect zero control.</p>

<p>If you just ask for a scan (with an eye toward DIY post and re-print) a standard minilab digitization run doesn't pick up much of the tonality and resolution potential of the film. The same goes for scanning the negative yourself; a high quality scanner that will do the film justice starts at $1k.</p>

<p>If you decide to optically print yourself, be prepared to set aside some dedicated space for the enlarger and all the ancillary equipment. Budget for the consumables too. Recurring cost is actually pretty close to that of desktop, small format inkjet.</p>

<p>The best low cost film route is to use one of the larger medium formats. Get a Mamiya RB-67 kit for about $300. Use traditional B&W film and develop it yourself. Scan the negative with a $100 Epson flatbed. Keep in mind, however, the total kit cost still approaches that of a good, used DSLR combo when it's all said and done.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thanks for all of the responses and suggestions, all. I will use a culmination of your advice to decide "where to go from here."<br>

Robert, I have a 4-year-old Canon Powershot S500 Digital Elph with a Compact Flash Card. I don't see that model on the list...It looks like the software is designed for Canon Powershot models with SD cards? I had no idea such a software existed. Thanks.</p>

I'm kind of wondering why anyone would say "Don't bother with film...go get a digital camera" in the Film and Processing Forum. Amanda said she wanted to try color film...so how did that turn into "go get a digital camera" ??

<p>I'm with Chris. I wonder why somebody would say "don't bother with film" because of costs, to somebody who already owns a 35mm camera, then "go get an RB67 and a scanner".</p>

<p>Is an S500 a contemporary of an SD500? I have one of those that I keep with me even though it's not as "good" as other cameras I have and it's a great handy camera for when there's good light but I wouldn't put it on the same level as a 35mm Pentax when quality is important. The 35mm camera can be used in the same "serious" situations where the pixel pushers would demand a high end DSLR.</p>

<p>The Ektar scan above was shot with a camera I paid $40 for, a lens I paid $25 for and a scanner I paid $80 for. The film and processing came to about $10. And that's what it looks like after (as I see now that I look at it on a better monitor) I screwed up the post-processing. The idea that you can't shoot film on a budget is silly. A $1000 scanner would be nice but it's hardly necessary.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I wonder why somebody would say "don't bother with film" because of costs, to somebody who already owns a 35mm camera, then "go get an RB67 and a scanner".</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That was hardly my suggestion. </p>

<p>Paraphrasing Amanda's query: "I'm a student. I want to grow as a photographer, but my priority is tuition, books, rent, and food. What camera should I look into?" The recommendation is any <a href="http://www.keh.com/Class-Products/1/DC/5/79269/WG.aspx">one of the used Canon P&S </a> supported by the <a href="http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK">CHDK software</a> .</p>

Maybe I should mention that I'm a student too, and I'm only working part-time. And yet, somehow I manage to shoot plenty of film...35mm and medium format. Somehow, I also manage to afford the supplies to develop B&W film and prints myself too. (Check out my earlier post about getting one of my friends interested in darkroom developing). On top of all that, I even manage to shoot some 8mm movie film sometimes too.

 

Yeah, the idea that shooting film is impossible on a budget is really silly. Trust me, I'm living proof that it is in fact very possible. I use almost ENTIRELY film for ALL my pictures now.

<p>Costco is the best deal around for high quality prints. They will doa 24 exposre roll with 4x6 prints for $3.88<br>

Or just get the hi res 2000x3000 scan to disk for 2.99<br>

Pick up a 5 Pack of Kodak Gold 200 at Walmart to get started with your color film. Add a $10 4 pack of Fuji 800 if you need the speed, and want to experiment with available light window portraits. I highly recopmmend this in fact, it will give you some fantastic results that your compact digital cant. The ability to handle the bright highlights and deep shadows of these types of shots with negative film far exceeds what compact digitals are capable of. Plus, iso 800 films looks way better than iso800 from a compact digital. None of this applies to DSLR's of course, with their excellent large sensors, only to the compact digital cameras like you have. also, film and your Pentax lenses will give very unique and beautiful results!</p>

<p>More info for keeping your budget:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/groups/ishootfilm/discuss/72157601574874556/">http://www.flickr.com/groups/ishootfilm/discuss/72157601574874556/</a></p>

<p>Ms. Amanda N.....</p>

<p>Your Pentax, although a pretty basic camera, can achieve anything that the highest priced auto-everything camera can do if you know how to work it. No problem, because working it is part of the fun of photography anyway. No camera can take any better picture than the user holding it or the glass attached to it. Nice thing about the Pentax is that there is a lot of top quality K-mount SMC glass available used, on a student budget. You can cheaply buy glass that will out resolve any of the color print films for sale today and or any reasonably priced digital camera. </p>

<p>The trouble in seeking high quality large scale prints is in the current high volume equipment. Yes, there are a few through-the-glass printers left, but try to find a handy one. Most all of the mass printers scan the film and print it digitally. Results vary and usually run from poor to barely acceptable. </p>

<p>Lower ISO film is generally sharper and has finer grain/dye clumps than higher ISO film. Ektar 100 probably has the least grain and Reala (100) is probably the sharpest. You can buy a lot of film for the price of even the cheapest decent DSLR. </p>

<p>Conclusion? Use the Pentax while a student and develop your skills on the cheap. After graduation, when you're making those "big bucks," you can decide if you are going to be fooled into buying a new camera that cannot produce the same quality of prints that your old Pentax can. Or if you want to treat yourself to something of quality or style or convenience, you'll have learned the difference between a good camera and a good sales pitch thereby making a better decision. </p>

<p>Tom<br /></p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thanks everyone. Lots of food for thought. ;-)</p>