Print film closest to slide film

Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by MikeM, Mar 22, 2005.

  1. MikeM

    MikeM Guest

    Is there a print film that has characteristics closer to slide film
    than other print films?

    Thanks
    Mike
     
    MikeM, Mar 22, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. MikeM

    bmoag Guest

    Once you scan a film negative you can do anything with it digitally.
    A scanned film negative is, in fact, a far superior image source than any
    current digital SLR. However it is nowhere near as convenient as using
    images that originate in the digital domain. Negative film material has far
    greater latitude than transparency films and far greater latitude than any
    digital sensor currently available anywhere at any price.
    Saturation, flesh tones, contrast: all is far easier to manipulate with a
    well exposed, wide latitude scanned color negative.
    It is no problem to out-Velvia Velvia, velveeta, the velvet rabbit or
    valvoline . . .
     
    bmoag, Mar 22, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. MikeM

    That_Rich Guest

    Don't want to get into a negative vs. slide vs. digital debate here
    but I agree that fine results can be achieved with negative film......

    Assuming you start with a properly exposed negative on a quality film,
    have access to a decent dedicated film scanner, good scanning software
    that you understand and some photoshop skills... da skies da limit.
    Oh..... and a considerable amount of spare time.

    RP©
     
    That_Rich, Mar 22, 2005
    #3
  4. MikeM

    Alan Browne Guest

    Which characteristics are you looking for?

    Negative film has wide latitude (comparatively), high tolerance for
    overexposure and scans easilly in most cases.

    Saturated versions like Portra 160VC, UC, 400UC, etc. give the poppoing
    colors.

    Portra 160NC scans very nicely.

    You just need a good understanding with the photo finisher.

    Nothing projects like a slide, hwoever.

    Cheers,
    Alan.
     
    Alan Browne, Mar 22, 2005
    #4
  5. MikeM

    chrlz Guest

    If you can find it, I think that my old favorite Konica Impresa 50 is
    the most slide-like, in terms of sharpness and that clean, fine-grain
    look you get from good slow slide film. I think there is a 100 version
    out now, but I haven't tried it. Impresa 50 is a great
    landscape/cityscape/blueskies/beach-portrait-tanned-skin film. It does
    the best blues of any film out there.. But it is a little unflattering
    on pale/pink skintones. Print/process it with Kodak, not Fuji (unless
    you have a good Frontier operator).. And you might even want to shoot
    it at 32-ish. Yes, it's v e r y slow.
     
    chrlz, Mar 22, 2005
    #5
  6. MikeM

    Scott W Guest

    You are sort of comparing apples and oranges when you compare slide to
    print film. With prints the output is limited to about 5 stops, so the
    brightest part on the print is about 32 time brighter then the darkest
    areas. Even thought slides have less exposure latitude they have a
    large output ranges, almost 1000 to 1, Velvia will go from a density of
    around 0.25 up to a bit over 3.25. This does not mean that it can
    capture a scene with 10 stops of range (which is what is needed for a
    1000:1 range), far from it, it is good for about 7 stops.

    So how can it only capture 7 stops but output a range of 10 stops,
    simple Velvia is a high contrast film, this is what gives slides their
    look and why it is so hard to duplicate in a print, the print lacks the
    output dynamic range that a slide has.

    Now if you are going to just scan the negative and view it on your
    computer screen then you can get the same output dynamic range of the
    slide. To get it to look more like a slide and less like a print boost
    the contrast and saturation and you will be there. Although now grain
    will be a bit more apparent, probably more so then it you just shot a
    slide to begin with.
     
    Scott W, Mar 22, 2005
    #6
  7. MikeM

    Roger Guest

    I'm going to assume you mean color saturation for your comparison
    characteristic. If so, I like the Kodak (Portra) UC 100 or 400 films.
    UC for Ultra Color. The film scans very easily and the grain structure
    is tight. The colors in UC400 have more pop than the UC100 version,
    but I find both very pleasing for general photography. The UC
    formulation is IMO much better than the 400 Supra which also had some
    slide film characteristics, but I found the reds too difficult to work
    with and constantly "blooming" and "smearing" across a fairly broad
    red range.

    Another very good negative film is Fuji Reala 100, but is a film for
    accurate reproduction of color (albeit sky tones tend to cyan). It's
    also easy to work with in a scanner. I find, for commercial prints,
    any of the Fuji materials have more "pop" when processed in Kodak
    commercial labs. The Fuji frontier curves in the USA tend to play down
    the color vibrancy in the prints, I don't think I can put my finger on
    any one characteristic (e.g. saturation).

    Anyway, if we are missing the target here, perhaps you could be a bit
    more definite in what characteristics you are trying to compare.

    Regards,
    Roger
     
    Roger, Mar 22, 2005
    #7
  8. MikeM

    Scott W Guest

    Since the OP restricted his question to film I did not mention digital
    as an option, I took it at face value that he wanted to shoot print
    film. Having said that you might want to take a look at this link
    http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/film.vs.digital.summary1.html
    in it Roger talks about the dynamic range of film, both slide and
    print, compared to a good DSLR, his conclusion is that a DSLR has more
    range then film. I have shot a lot of both and I believe he may be
    just a bit hard on print film I do believe that a DSLR has as much
    range as print film and way more range then slide film, which has an
    very narrow range indeed, at the very best slide film has a range of
    just under 7 stops.
     
    Scott W, Mar 22, 2005
    #8
  9. MikeM

    Scott W Guest

    Since the OP restricted his question to film I did not mention digital
    as an option, I took it at face value that he wanted to shoot print
    film. Having said that you might want to take a look at this link
    http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/film.vs.digital.summary1.html
    in it Roger talks about the dynamic range of film, both slide and
    print, compared to a good DSLR, his conclusion is that a DSLR has more
    range then film. I have shot a lot of both and I believe he may be
    just a bit hard on print film I do believe that a DSLR has as much
    range as print film and way more range then slide film, which has an
    very narrow range indeed, at the very best slide film has a range of
    just under 7 stops.
     
    Scott W, Mar 22, 2005
    #9
  10. MikeM

    Alan Browne Guest

    I never consider slide film to give more than III to VII. With a film
    like Velvia 100F that III is more like III.5.
     
    Alan Browne, Mar 22, 2005
    #10
  11. No. Print films make prints. Slide films make slides. It's real simple.
     
    uraniumcommittee, Mar 22, 2005
    #11
  12. Is there a print film that has characteristics closer to slide film
    Which characteristics are you looking for?

    -Joel
     
    Dr. Joel M. Hoffman, Mar 22, 2005
    #12
  13. MikeM

    jimkramer Guest

    So you don't know what an Ilfochrome is? Maybe Cibachrome for someone
    that's been using a Leica for 30 years?

    Jim
     
    jimkramer, Mar 22, 2005
    #13
  14. MikeM

    Sander Vesik Guest

    except when one uses a reversal kit on a print film or transfers the result
    to a transparency or makes a print from a slide...

    not that there really was much danger of anybody taking your comment seriously...
     
    Sander Vesik, Mar 22, 2005
    #14
  15. MikeM

    MikeM Guest

    Film is the only option for me until good digital SLRs drop a lot more
    in price. I am trying to get to the western part of Australia (not
    just Western Australia) where most of the spectacular natural places
    that I want to visit are, hence my interest in the best film because
    if I get there at all I probably won't get a second chance. Slide film
    seems to be the film of choice for the sort of place I want to go but
    print film is more forgiving if I forget to change settings as I
    sometimes do.

    Thanks
    Mike
     
    MikeM, Mar 22, 2005
    #15
  16. MikeM

    ian lincoln Guest

    Thats only true if you happen to own a drum scanner. Personally its not
    just the pixels, my images are cleaner and lower noise from my dslr than
    scans from my scan elite II even with full ice and restoration etc.
     
    ian lincoln, Mar 22, 2005
    #16
  17. MikeM

    ian lincoln Guest

    if you are not scanning and are not optically printing from slide then slide
    film lattitude is down to +/- 1/2 EV.
     
    ian lincoln, Mar 22, 2005
    #17
  18. MikeM

    chrlz Guest

    Sorry if this turns into a duplicate post - my previous effort seems to
    have vanished..

    Depends on the characteristics, but you might want to try Konica
    Impresa 50 (if you can find it) - very fine grain, very sharp, does
    wonderful blues so is great for sunny landscapes, cityscapes, beach
    portraiture. Good on tanned skin, not quite as kind on pale/pink
    fleshtones. Suggest Kodak processing/printing for best results.

    Otherwise, shoot Fuji Reala, and ramp up the contrast in
    post-processing.
     
    chrlz, Mar 22, 2005
    #18
  19. MikeM

    That_Rich Guest

    Gave up trying to procure Impressa 50... it's all gone.
    Wish I'd have stockpiled.
    Have yet to try the 100, wasn't even aware of it.... I'm gonna go have
    a look.

    RP©
     
    That_Rich, Mar 22, 2005
    #19
  20. MikeM

    Chadwick Guest


    I've been recommended to use Fuji Reala 100 as the nearest print film
    to Velvia.

    My own photos of Australia were all shot on Fuji Superia from a
    supermarket and I boosted the saturation afterwards in Photoshop
    because the colours were washed out. I only got as far west as Uluru,
    but hopefully my experience is still relevant to the kind of colours
    you'll be seeing.
     
    Chadwick, Mar 23, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.