Medium Format Magic Colour

[ross_wilson1]

I've got a few medium format prints taken during dusk, and some of the colours

I get are, well, magic.

 

Some are subtle some are eye popping, but all have one thing in common; I

don't have any 35mm negs/slides with these same colour attributes.

 

Is this just because I'm more likely to shoot dusk with MF than 35mm or is it

because the larger negative is capturing more colours than the 35mm? If it's a

format difference, could someone enlighten me as to why just more neg area

does this?

 

I was looking to sell my MF gear to buy more Leica stuff but, I don't want to

do it if I'm never going to see those colours again.

 

Cheers

[paul_neuthaler]

Don't ever, ever sell your MF gear -- particularly if its Hasselblad!

[james_symington1]

It's not the format as such. The colours you get would be the same on 35mm. What does make a difference is that medium format photography tends to force you into taking more considered photographs than firing off 35mm usually does. I think most photographers would agree that the necessarily slower pace of using manual, meterless MF gear usually improves results. It is certainly the case with me. I'm told it is even more so for LF but I have not ventured down that path yet.

[johnmarkpainter]

It's easy enough to shoot your Leica right next to your MF and see for yourself. The Colors

will be the same. You will see more gradations in Tone with MF.

 

jmp

[ross_wilson1]

John, if I see more gradations in tone, and if using colour film, tones are represented in shades of colours, will I therefore see more colours? Or do I have the wrong end of the stick?

[pavelp]

Ross, I think you see more tonal gradations (which are usually quite attractive) and also color interactions that you do not notice when shooting a smaller format. Also, apparent sharpness might be better because of more details in the picture.

 

I think the idea of shooting the same scene with two different formats and then comparing the difference my give you more insight into this mystery.

[Gary Naka]

I have to ask the obvious question, are you comparing using the SAME type of film for both 35mm and MF? If you look at the Kodak or Fuji line, they have different film types. For example, from everything I read, Velvia is a lot more vivid than the 35mm Ektachrome 64 I used to shoot.

 

The other thing is you do tend to get some pretty nice colors at that time of the day.

 

Get a roll of the same type of film and shoot both MF and 35mm side by side, then compare them over a lightbox.

[johnmarkpainter]

Ross,

 

I suppose it could be interpreted as 'more colors' technically speaking.

If you want to see something REALLY shocking, try shooting 4x5 sometime.

 

I shoot Leica too....still great for what they do best.

[vet 57]

The first time I shot the same subject, with the same film on 6x6 and 35mm, the colour saturation ,purity,and tonality of the M/F images from what was a fairly cheap TLR compared with the very expensive 35mm SLR I had at the time gave me a lot to think about,this was nearly twenty years ago I now use M/F almost all the time, I still have a 35mm SLR system gathering dust.