Color Slide versus Negative film for fine art lanscape/nature photography

[paul_frank]

The basic question of slide v. negative films has been beaten to death

already. But after visiting the gallery of a local landscape photographer

today, I've been thinking alot more about it(sorry if this is a long

question, bear with me).

 

The standard answer for why to shoot slides is usually cost(don't have

to pay for a 4x6 print each time), feedback of exposure errors, no worry

of whether the 16 year old at walmart balanced the colors accurately,

etc.

 

I consider myself a fine art lanscape photographer, i.e. I print my own

work myself and that is my end goal - a fine print. For me, negatives

seem the ideal film as I can apply the same concepts and controls I use

in my b&w work in my color work. I never worry about cost per frame,

because I only enlarge the "keepers." No worries about color balance, I

do it myself. I bring both types of film everywhere I go and suit the film

to the subject. However, I am noticing that just about every "fine art"

color landscape photographer out there shoots transparencies rather

than negatives, and prints by either ilfochrome(in rare cases) or by

lightjet prints. Technically(not always compositionally/emotionally) my

color prints certainly rival ilfochrome and lightjet prints from

transparencies in terms of contrast and saturation(I mainly shoot Konica

Impresa 50), and I print on the same fuji CA paper that these lightjet

digital prints come out on. So why can't I seem to find any other

lanscape photographers out there who shoot c-41 film and print their

own negatives by traditional means? I'd like to hear people's thoughts

and hear expecially from any landscape photogs who *do* shoot

negative film. Thanks!

 

Paul Frank

[brien_szabo]

Paul, I've seen lots of good photgraphers who shoot negative film. I was at a SugarLoaf craft show not too long ago (these are big shows) There were six landscape photographers there who all ( to my surprise) shot print film. One guys work was so good, such high quality stuff, I couldn't believe it was from print film. he did all his own darkroom and printing. Top Notch. If print works for you, don't let someone who shoots slides change your mind. Personally i prefer shooting slides, but that's me. The question becomes whether you want to see your work in a magazine or postcard, etc.., then you may find yourself hard pressed to find someone who will accept print/negative film material.

[paul_frank]

Is it really that impossible to put prints into magazines, calendars, etc? Ansel Adams seems to have done it plenty. But I really know nothing about *that* kind of printing. Maybe someone can shed some light on that for me.

[bobatkins]

It's not impossible to put images from negative film in magazines etc., it's just that most publishing houses are set up to use slide film. Slides are much easier to evaluate than negatives (you can see sharpness and color without depending on a print) and they serve as their own color reference.

 

If you have Ansel Adams name and reputation, most publishing houses would bend the rules a bit!

[scott_eaton]

Paul,

 

Most commercial guys who sell large format prints also need to keep to a medium that allows for the largest distribution channel. That means shooting slides so they can mass produce posters to fit on the wall of bookstores, mall art galleries, and the occasional calendar to pay the bills.

 

With a few exceptions I've seen more nasty Cibachromes than good ones, and have made it a personal habit over the years to make that over blown trash look second rate compared to my Fujiflex prints from negs. You'll find that most Cibachrome addicts are more concerned about bragging that it's a Cibachrome than the quality of their work, so ignore them.

 

I've sold more large prints from neg film than I care to recall, and right now I shoot a mix of slide and color neg depending on the circumstances. I also know a lot of guys who shoot MF and LF negs, but simply aren't commercial enough to bother with trannies. Good LightJet printing means that you have a guy running a drum trying to figure out exactly what you want and slides certainly make a far better point of reference than a neg. If you have your own desktop scanner and larger format ink-jet printer you'll find a mix of both mediums is the best solution.

 

The next point is that the really kick-ass print films with exellent color density range for landscape images no longer exist. Konica Impresa has really good depth and superb grain, but it lacks the impact of any Fuji slide film. Try Impresa on Fujiflex glossy if you want some knock-out images that are very easy to sell.

[ShunCheung]

A lot of professional landscape/nature photographers sell their work to the printed media, and the publishers and magazines prefer slides for reasons that have already been given: e.g. easier to judge a slide than a negative.

 

If you print your own work and negative works for you, that is great. What someone else uses doesn't really matter, right? Unless you are in a competitive market and you need to become better than someone else.

 

As I have said before, in a few years most of us will switch to digital although medium and especially large-format film will be around for (much) longer. Slide vs. negative will be moot point soon.

[m._huber]

Stay your course. You are doing the right thing, especially as you are in complete control of each stage of the process. Also, more magazines etc. are accepting submissions other then slides as their technology advances. Don't worry about what others are doing; they may be enving you.

[m._huber]

Off the question -- free advice, which never has to be taken.

If I had your goals and your artistic eye, I would consider a MF camera. (and negative film)

[miles_hecker]

Paul,

 

I was a dedicated negative printer for many years. If you intend to do analog printing in a wet lab, by all means stay with negatives.

Analog printing from slides is technically VERY challenging.

 

I must say that I agree with Scott that most of the current negative films don't have a color balance that is designed for landscape work.

Flesh tones and landscapes are very different beasts.

 

But, if you're not computer phobic look into the digital world.

Wonderful low cost, high quality 35mm film scanners can be had for $500. The Polaroid Sprintscan 4000 for instance.

In the digital world, IMHO for landscapes, transparencies are the way to go.

 

They scan with less visible grain and of course don't require a proof sheet for evaluation. Provia 100F is a wonderful, warm almost grainless emulsion. Velvia of course has it's worshipers and is great for certain situations, but it can drive auto everything scanning software nuts.

 

Best of all the computer dark room will give you the kind of creative control which is impossible to obtain printing color in the traditional darkroom.

 

See http://www.wyofoto.com/landscapes.htm

 

for some of my latest landscape work

 

Miles Hecker

[scott_eaton]

Miles,

 

Your "Maligne Lake Sunset" Rocks! That's a beaut' of a shot.

 

I've used up all my Pro-100 120, and Fuji NPC juse doesn't cut it with me, so it's difficult to get good color density with the print films that Provia/Astia/Velvia do so well.

[paul_frank]

Thanks for the input everyone. Now I have a question for Scott Eaton - What is the difference between Fujiflex papers and the Standard C/P Crystal Archive? Be as technical as you feel like. Thanks!

[prosenjit_singha_deo]

A technical question but trivial one? How do you manage a TRADITIONAL color print from a negative. How can you work in complete darkness inside the dark room? For black and white I can keep a red light, but what to do for printing from a color negative? If I can do that I too can make large prints at cheap costs. So can some one help me?

[m._huber]

Prosenjit, For straight printing, working in the dark is not a problem. In fact, I sometimes forget I can turn on a safelight for black and white. It just takes practice like loading film in the dark. It does help me to have a paper safe and to arrange everything in the same place before I turn off the lights. The only other problem is finding the emulsion side of the paper (where a paper safe also helps because the emulsion side is alway the same.)

[prosenjit_singha_deo]

Thanks Huber. This will give me the drive to explore into the printing business.