chris_jordan5 Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 Hey guys, happy October to you, and a quick question: Does anyone know what is considered the sharpest, finest-grained LF color neg film on the market? I have heard that Fuji puts its super-fine- grain technology into its color neg films but I'm not sure if that means they are finer-grained than the Kodak or other color neg films. Thoughts? ~cj www.chrisjordanphoto.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave schlick Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 its probably the higher cost of print films developing and printing that keeps pros from asking for the type of film you are looking for.. as you start to use 4x5 you will have to make a lot of changes that you wont like, but in the long run you will find that the changes are becouse other photographers dont prefer what you want, and it takes millions of purchases to pay for film on the shelf that soon expires in all the towns in the usa. print films in large format tend towards people type films that are not tack sharp but have good skin tones,to make the ladies look good for blowups, and black and white that can be proc essed at home or locally. .. the next step is slide film like velvia for scenics or provia for other less saturated shots.. they can be proccesed yourself or by a lab for less than print film with prints..velvia with proccessing for one shot costs about 4-7 bucks a pop (i forget how much exactly) in my neighborhood.. then you view the lot with a light box and loop to find what you want.. even the sharp print films are getting hard to find in medium format.. i have to order reala fuji 100 film 120 from a big order house that has been shippied into the us from foregn markets.. its very good stuff for sharp neg film... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
www.graemehird.com Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 Dave, I think you might find that Chris is an experienced LFer already. He knows why films come and go. Chris, I wish I could help, but I also want to know the answer to your question. I get the impression that any of the lower speed negs films from Fuji will do the trick. Given the large area of the film it shouldn't make too much of a difference for prints to the size you normally make (I've seen the pictures on the wall of your workplace via internet). Cheers, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pvp Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 <I>Thoughts?</I><P>One that comes to mind, is that grain isn't much of an issue unless you're going to be making <I>really</I> big enlargements... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armin_seeholzer Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 Hi Chris I only know from a german phot. mag that Fuji is the leader on the slide site and also with the B/W Acros neg.The new Fuji Astia F is thies days the finest grained positiv film, after thad test in the mag follewed by Velvia!And if I looked on an older test also the negativs from Fuji could get enlarged most bevor grain got a problem!So I think you should know the answer!But I prever Kodak for the better exacter colors, but I have now to test the new Fuji, maybe they also improved in colors! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim_curry Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 Chris, I've used Fuji's NPS 160 in 4x5. I ran it at 160, hand held, for a parade on St. Patrick's day and was very pleased with the results. Very smooth and decent colors considering I'm used to transparency film. It is available in 8x10 as well. I was able to get good prints without a tripod, so setting up would certainly give good prints for enlargement in 8x10 format. Haven't used Great Yellow Father's 400vc, but you might try it with the larger format and compare it to the 160 to see if there's enough there for a decent print. Just how big are you planning on going? tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave schlick Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 why go to the trouble and expense of 4x5 if you dont want large prints? sounds like medium formant is the best solution for what you folks are talking about.. if using 4x5 and you cant do a 30x40 your wasting a lot of money, and worse yet all the shots inbetween that the setup time of medium can give.. ??? dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob fowler Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 <i>"why go to the trouble and expense of 4x5 if you dont want large prints? sounds like medium formant is the best solution for what you folks are talking about.."</i><p> uhh... How's using swings & tilts for starters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmk Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 Hmmm...coming from MF and just entering LF but I don't make large prints. Why? Three reasons: control, control, control. And BTW, LF vrs MF in terms of price....well, for the most part, I think LF is cheaper in equipment unless you go for the ultra high-end. Processing is another story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_jordan5 Posted October 23, 2003 Author Share Posted October 23, 2003 Okay fellas, let me try this one again. I am a full-time professional photographic artist with 25 years of photographic experience. I have shot approximately $100,000 worth of film over the last twenty years, and most of my work in the last 13 years has been with 4x5 and 8x10 formats. So, thanks, but for now I don't need any novice advice about any aspect of photography except the particular question I asked. I appreciate the good intentions of all the guys who presume everyone is a novice and who like handing out advice to anyone who will listen, but this forum gets really tiresome with it sometimes. My question is simple and narrowly framed. If you happen to know the answer, please respond; if you don't know the answer, please do not respond. Question: Does anyone know what is the finest-grained LF color negative film currently on the market? ~cj www.chrisjordan.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_buehler Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 Wow! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt miller cambridge, ia Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 Here's some info on <a href="http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/e58/e58.jhtml" >Kodak's</a> films, scroll to the bottom. And <a href="http://www.fujifilm.com/JSP/fuji/epartners/bin/AF3-809E.pdf" >Fuji's</a>. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_jordan5 Posted October 23, 2003 Author Share Posted October 23, 2003 Matt, thanks for the response. The bummer is that Kodak and Fuji use two different measuring methods, which don't seem to compare. I presume that Fuji, being the more technologically advanced company, is making the finest-grained film (NPS 160), but Kodak makes a 100ASA film that might be finer. I can't seem to find out, other than by spending a couple of hundred bucks running tests. ~cj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob fowler Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 Chris, you're absolutely right, we do have a habit of getting carried away sometimes (OK, a lot of times). There really isn't a lot of choices in LF color neg, but I'd say (in my experience), NPS is slightly finer grained than Portra 160. On the flip side of the coin, I get better results scanning Portra than I do NPS. All things considered, I usually stick with the Great Yellow Father for LF color neg and Fuji for chromes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jnanian Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 chris: i shot some nps for a job about a month ago. it was VERY fine grained. i don't know if it is the finest grained film, but it might be pretty close :) good luck! john btw: what ever happened to your fourth of july experiment with the 3 8/10 cameras? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcus_horbach Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 Chris, here is one more ingredient that is really related to the Fuji vs Kodak choice: even if Fuji would offer a finer grain, its four-layer technology may result in a lesser sharpness. Another complication in answering your question might be that grain is more apparent in areas of a specific color, and that this characteristic may be different for different films. If you find a good answer to your question by experimenting, will you let us know the results? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_jordan5 Posted October 23, 2003 Author Share Posted October 23, 2003 Akkk-- I thought there might be an easy answer but as usual it's more complicated that I anticipated. So it looks like I'll have to go do the old side-by-side thing with several films. Jeez I hate testing! I'll let you guys know what I find out. ~cj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt miller cambridge, ia Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 Somewhere in <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=001ilK" >this thread</a> is a formula to convert Kodak's print grain index to RMS. Might help you find a place to start your testing. Like John, I'm curious about your 3 8x10 July 4th experiment too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt miller cambridge, ia Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 Actually, I just read the whole thread. Be sure to check out the chart at the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthew_brain Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 Try this table of comparisons http://creekin.net/films.htm It is only taken from the data sheets but down the bottom it shows a conversion from the Kodak PGI to RMS. Matt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave schlick Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 reponse to B0b only, not to viewed by others that may take offence., Bob, try a quality roll back on your favorite 4x5. 120 or 220 i like 6x9.. with all the films available in medium format, you also have more room for shifts etc, but need wider lenses for same view as 4x5 .. dave.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian304 Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 I know you really don't want "noise" as an answer Chris, but what about this idea: Shooting Kodak or Fuji 160 and pulling back to ISO 100? Won't that help with the grain?Brian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upscan Posted October 24, 2003 Share Posted October 24, 2003 Chris: I asked myself the same question and looked at the tech data for color neg films and did some tests. As for grain, Fuji NPS, Superia and Agfa Optima all have RMS specs of 4 so they should have identical grain size. Are they? Comparing shots taken on Agfa's Optima 100 with identical shots taken on Superia 200 (same RMS as Fuji NPS) showed the difference to be staggering. Agfa optima's grain was perhaps only a 1/3 the size and much smoother that of the Fuji's ugly pepper looking grain, yet both are reported as having identical RMS. Mind, these were scans. Kodak rates their Portra NC160 as the finest grain of their films. Given the choices in available 4X5 film sizes this narrows your selection to Portra NC and Fuji NPS (which supposedly has the same grain as Superia 200(?)). If you include 120 roll film, I'd pick Agfa Optima 100, else, the choice is between NPS and Portra NPC. Both films are available in 35mm size for a quick compare. As for sharpness among the 4X5 films, the Kodak Portra NC160 seems to have a slight edge over the Fuji NPS, looking at the MTF data. The Agfa Optima is a distant second in sharpness to the othe two. There are so few films left in LF that the selection is quite simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jan_brittenson Posted October 24, 2003 Share Posted October 24, 2003 I'm kind of searching for a good landscape color neg film, also. Mainly for uses where a complex (not easily GND'd) subject is backlit and I want foreground detail. I've only tried 160VC so far, and, well, it's not what I want. It had the latitude, but scanned the grain is absolutely horrible and shadow colors murky and off. Better suited for art projects (I could see shooting it in 35mm for things like CD covers, or alternative-press portraiture). I tried it in 120, but would like something also available in sheet. (Preferably Readyload/Quickload since I would only use it rarely.) I shot a few rolls of Ektar 25 some 10 years ago, something like that available in 120 and RL/QL sheet would be excellent! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oskar_ojala Posted October 25, 2003 Share Posted October 25, 2003 Kodak 100T is a negative film for tungsten light and the opinions of those few who've actually used it tends to be mixed. Portra 160 NC is a great film, but it's not the most fine grained emulsion there is. I haven't used Fuji NPS, but if I'd have to bet money, I'd say that NPS is probably finer grained. In any case, if you're going to test, limit your test to these two films (Potra VC will be grainier than NC and 100T doesn't sound good). Chances are that the difference won't be staggering, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now