  |
|
|
| Search and Shop at the B&H Store |
Articles and Reviews
Photography
Edwin's World
Readers' Gallery
Site Map
NikonLinks
Wedding Photography
|
Home >> Photography >> Accessories
Film
This is now a dated article, circa 2001, especially as I am now shooting digitally full time since 2005.
 These
comments are based upon my experiences with them, your mileage will
likely vary with each type of film. Some things to take note of:
- I
use to believe what the film box said for ISO speed and shot it
at the rated speed but no more, especially with Kodak films, even
with their Portra film, which were suppose to be truly what the
ISO figure indicated.
- Instead
of futzing around with the ISO over ride on my cameras, I just load
the film at the rated ISO but dial-in at least a half-stop of plus
compensation, so that it mimics rating an 800 speed film at 600
instead. It works well with Fuji films and for the most part with
Kodak films too. Some films such as Ilford XP-2 need even more compensation
and this ISO 400 film is more likely a true ISO 200.
- Although
I like certain films over others in 35mm format, most of the professional
negative films rock in 120 format. There are times when I think
the film is not even the same when looking at results from both
formats using the supposed same film type. Medium format rocks my
world!
Fuji Films
- NPS
160 is the gold standard for color negative films for me. The old
Kodak VPS 160 was not bad but not as good as NPS 160. Low contrast
that still brings out colors very well although in bright sunlit
conditions Kodak Portra 160NC might just better it. Whenever I shoot
a wedding, I try to have a roll of NPS 160 loaded and ready to go
for any outdoor shooting. The slower speed definitely helps to reduce
depth of field for better fill-flash use than the ISO 400 speed
films.
- Fuji
NPC 160 was tried a little while ago (December 2001), a higher saturation
film than the wonderful NPS 160. Higher saturation indeed, which
would make it a good film to use on dreary overcast days or as a
general purpose film on sunny days, however, I do not care for this
film. Fuji's prowess with red tones shines through once more with
colors on the very warm side of accurate and skin tones do not fare
so well. For portaits, play it safe and use NPS 160 instead of the
hyper colors of NPC 160. In some ways it reminds of the ultra saturated
Agfa Ultra 50, which is garish at best.
- NPH
400 was once my standard for ISO 400 speed films until I saw what
Kodak Portra 400NC could do. A wedding in which I shot both Kodak
and Fuji films had me do a double take when I saw that the Kodak
film had a more neutral look with less warmth than was exhibited
by Fuji NPH. I had expected the results to be reversed. I still
like NPH 400 though and go through plenty of it during a wedding
with it rated at ISO 300.
- NHG
II 800 was the high speed film of choice for me. Unlike its companion
films of NPS 160 and NPH 400, NHG 800 seemed to have a more pronounced
red cast that could cause trouble with red faces. I usually shot
NHG 800 at ISO 640, which seemed to work really nicely for good
looking prints. NHG
II has been praised in a recent issue of Popular Photography for
having excellent pushing abilities. The magazine states that one
can push it three stops. I don’t know about pushing it but I can
say that it pulls very well. I shot a roll by mistake at ISO 400
once and had the lab pull it a stop. The results were very satisfactory
with no detriment to color or contrast.
- NPZ
800 is the replacement for NHG II 800 and although I haven't shot
as much of it as NHG, it seems pretty similar in overall quality.
I don't trust the film rating and usually go with my default half-stop
of compensation for negative films to ensure good shadow details.
NPZ also appears to have just a strong a tendency to overdo reds
as the old NHG did.
- Fuji Super G and Superia Films -
I lived on these films early on when I first got into photography.
Cheap with lots of bright colors and a bit of a cool tone compared
to the Kodak equivalents. I don’t use them much anymore, as I prefer
to use the lower contrast films for everyday shooting with people.
Reds really come out here and in
certain people, with the flash bounced off the ceiling, the consumer
Fuji films make them look like candidates for a heart transplant
operation. Poster people for the before shots in the lifestyle
change ads. Be very careful how you use them for people shots
but great for general outdoor usage.
-
Fuji
Reala - I've only shot this film a few times and it seems to be
in between the low contrast pro films and the super saturated
consumer films. As with anything that tries to be all things to
all people, Reala doesn't quite succeed as well as one might have
hoped, however, I would use Reala first before NPC 160.
One very important thing to keep
in mind when using Fuji pro films, don't push them unless you absolutely
need to! On a couple of occasions I mistakenly shot NPS 160 at higher
ISOs (one and two stops over) and the one stop push was barely passable
and the two stop push was garbage bin material. Thankfully the prints
were for myself and not for other people.
- Fuji Velvia - the favorite of pros
and amateurs alike for several years and who am I to buck the trend.
Band wagon effect or not this film is a winner. I know that many
photographers like to shoot the film at an ISO of 40 instead of
the rated 50 and even Fuji acknowledges that but I tend to like
the slight bit of underexposure and what it does for the slides.
The colors are even more saturated and vivid but you can sometimes
have too much of a good thing.
Skin tones do not always come out so well.
As I mentioned earlier, my own experience with Fuji films, pro and
consumer types have them with a bit of a red bias. But I have found
that when shooting Velvia in heavy overcast conditions, shot at
the rated ISO 50 speed, skin tones come out remarkably well. Go
figure.
- Fuji Astia - more neutral in balance then Velvia. I used it mainly to test equipment
or just fart around with so I haven’t done anything with a more
critical eye yet. The extra bit of speed over Velvia is nice to
have during hand holding sessions. For cross processing techniques, this is the film to use thanks
to more generous renditions of skin tones.
- Fuji
Provia F 100 - a favorite of many photographers thanks to its fine
grain, which is even better than Velvia without the loss of film
speed. Less saturation than Velvia but Provia F is still a damn
good film for bringing out the colors. My current default choice
for slide films.
Link to Fuji
Films USA
Kodak Films
- VPS 160
PMC 400 PMZ 1000
I bought 15 rolls
of Kodak pro grade 35mm format films for my brother-in-law’s wedding.
Five rolls of each type to cover the needs for the whole day and
night. I liked VPS and PMC, very similar in nature to the Fuji equivalents
but PMZ is a different story. I was appalled by the results I got
from this film. Since every roll I shot of the PMZ 1000 came out
the same and since the developer I used did the VPS and PMC as well
with good results, I could only conclude that it was the film that
was the cause of the problem I thought I had.
The PMZ 1000
prints all looked soft, like I had miss-focused every shot to a
very minute degree. I had actually thought that my 35-70mm 2.8 lens
had been thrown out of alignment at first but subsequent use of
the lens proved otherwise. Even my wife was surprised at how soft
the prints looked. My wife has no interest in photography but she
has gotten use to the results that the Nikon glass will give us
for our prints and she is quick to point out my mistakes with a
harsh tongue. So for her to agree with my initial assessment made
me wonder what in the hell did Kodak do and how could they possibly
market such an inferior product?
An article in
Photo Technique Magazine (Sept/Oct 98) comparing PMZ 1000 to Fuji’s
NHG II 800 explained it to me. Basically the article’s writer mentioned
that Fuji’s NHG II 800 had higher contrast then Kodak’s PMZ 1000.
Higher contrast is often mistaken by the eye as being sharper (accutance).
The reviewer’s test of the films concluded that PMZ 1000 is actually
a very sharp film for its speed and that it compared quite well
to the Fuji competitor. So I have my answer as to why I was so surprised
by the results from Ben’s wedding. Incidentally, I almost forgot
to mention that I had shot a left over roll of NHG II 800 early
on at the banquet. After I finished the Fuji roll, I moved on to
the PMZ 1000. So I had the two competitors side by side to compare
with which further added to the disappointment of the Kodak film. I also
shot all the rolls of film at their rated speeds, which I have since
learned not to do, given a manufacturer's often generous accounting
of their product's true speed.
- Portra 160 - Portra 160NC in 120
format is quite phenomenal in bright sunny conditions and is the
equal of Fuji NPS 160 under studio flash. I have not tried Portra
160 in 35mm format yet.
- Portra
400VC - is not a film I would want to use on a regular basis. Skin tones
do not come out looking so good to my eyes. One of the reasons why
I went to Fuji Pro films early on was the way Kodak did skin tones.
With the consumer grade films of Gold and Royal Gold, the people
I took pictures off all looked like they had come back from a Hawaiian
vacation. A golden burnish was evident in the skin tones. Of course
if you go with consumer Fuji films your subjects run the risk of
coming out like they’re about to have a heart attack. Maybe the
golden burnish isn’t so bad after all. But Kodak films also tend
to be very warm in nature and I see the same type of warmth in the
400VC. I like Fuji's cooler rendition of a scene instead.
- Portra
400NC - tried this once in 35mm format under mixed lighting. Skin
tones looked muddy, however, colors seemed nice and accurate. Then
I tried it in 120 format and it delivered better looking results
than Fuji NPH 400, a roll of which was also shot at the same shoot
under the same conditions of cloudless day in late afternoon light.
The 120 version of Portra 400NC was very impressive.
- Portra
800 - this film is passable at its rated ISO of 800, muddy colors
and skin tones especially in overcast light. Even at ISO 600, it
tends to be iffy and only at ISO 500 does its quality come through
with good colors and nice skin tones. Me thinks this is a true ISO
400 film that Kodak has dressed up as a high speed film to try and
counter Fuji's success with NHG and now NPZ.
- Portra
400CN - this black and white film is quite nice when given a half-stop
of plus compensation (ISO 300 equivalent). It's been a while since
I shot TMAX 400, but I think Portra 400CN is a better film with
more contrast. Have not shot too many rolls of this film, hence
the brief comments.
- PJ 160 - I bought this film by mistake.
I was at Broadway Camera to pick up my new Bronica kit and I wanted
to buy some film to run the new kit through. I looked in the fridge
amd saw the big 160 ISO number on the familiar yellow colored box.
I grabbed the pro pack of five without thinking twice about it and
assumed that it was VPS 160. Later on at home, I took a closer look
and to my consternation discovered that it was PJ 160 and not VPS
160 in 120 length. A quick look at the write up of film types in
a Peterson's Photographic magazine (one of the few times this magazine
actually had useful information) revealed PJ 160 to be more for
police crime photography or other types of forensic use.
Just great. What the hell did I buy? Oh well,
I muttered and chalked it off as a learning experience and planned
on using it for just very basic snap shooting with the Bronica.
After I finally finished off my first roll of film and got the prints
back from the lab, I was pleasantly surprised. Not as bad as I thought
and for once the trademark Kodak warmth didn't put me off. I liked
the results more with each passing roll of film. I was still using
it for testing mostly, like what my various Cokin filters would
do with medium format, but good results each time. I shot it at
the rated ISO and had no problems with it. Looks good with flash
too (TTL mode with the SCA 386 and Metz 45 CL-4). A sleeper film
that might just surprise you.
- TMAX 100 and 400 - Haven’t
shot a whole lot of B&W film but with the Bronica in hand now,
I want to experiment more. TMAX is considered pretty safe for the
beginning shooter due to its latitude but I find it boring. Perhaps
my processor isn’t that great with B&W so I want to try it out
some more with other B&W developers. I have only shot this film
type in 35mm format and have yet to be really impressed by it. But
one instance of TMAX 100 being a good choice was for some shots
of a bodybuilder I took some time ago.
I took the shots of the body builder shortly
after he had a competition. He wanted to get some shots of himself
before he gained his weight back and smoothed over. Since I wanted
to try and isolate him from the background, I used my Nikkor 80-200
2.8 for most of the shots. Using a larger aperture allowed Ron to
come out from the background. Since enlargements were key to this
shoot, I took all the shots with my tripod and also since B&W's
were desired, I used TMAX 100.
Ron chose his favorite pose and had the negative
enlarged to 20x30 with a blue sepia tone finish. The resulting print
was quite good with decent integrity as far as clarity and grain
were concerned. I was happy and more importantly, Ron was happy.
Ron’s mother was the happiest as she became the proud owner of the
print. Ron told me about how his mother took the print to her work
place to show off her son's build. I should add that the conditions
were quite bright as we missed the good light of sunrise due to
a change in shooting location.
Update to the TMAX films. My friend
Birt advised me that TMAX films tend to do poorly in overcast conditions
while excelling in bright sunlight. Seems to jive with my experience
using Kodak's color films too.
- E100VS and E200 - E100VS is a great film that has very good
saturation and a very critical extra stop of speed over Velvia.
When shooting seriously with the tripod I still favour Velvia but
when handholding then I move over this film or its even faster sibling
E200. E200 is not as saturated but for just kicking around town
with the Nikon I find it very nice to have the extra speed, especially
when I have the bigger 80-200 f2.8 or the slower 24-120mm lens.
- Kodachrome 64 - a very interesting
film and one that I've shot a few rolls of because it was the gold
standard for slide films and used extensively by National Geographic
photographers in the past. Legendary archival qualities that blow
away the E-6 type of film and I finally discovered how Kodakchrome
could last for so long. Kodachrome is actually a black and white
film that has color added in during the processing stages. This
also helps to explain why the Kodachrome process is so complex and
utilizes various noxious chemicals in the process. As with other
black and white films, Kodachrome enjoys long lasting capabilities
when stored properly. Unfortunately, Kodak appears to be doing everything
that it can to dissuade people from using it.
Long turnaround times due to all films in Canada having to be shipped
back to New York state. Average is two-weeks but it can take as
long as three and often times, the slides come back dirty and gunked
up. And what's with the cheap cardboard slide mounts? Most quality
labs use sturdier plastic mounts (yes, there are times when I actually
prefer something to be made of plastic).
The film itself is less saturated than modern day E-6 formulations
but thanks to its more neutral cast and longeivity, Kodachrome is
still a favorite of Steve McCurry, the National Geographic photographer
who took the photo of the Afgan refugee girl way back in 1985, which
just happens to be the most famous National Geographic image ever.
By now, most everyone knows that the girl, Sharbat Gula, was found
by McCurry and NG in early 2002, 17 years after the 1985 cover story.
My experience with Fuji and Kodak slide
films has led me to this generalization, Fuji for superior greens
and Kodak for superior reds although either company's best films would
satisfy me as they seemed to have equaled each other in recent times.
Link to Kodak
Reader's comment December 25,
2004:
Just
read your write-up on Kodochrome films:
- The cheap cardboard mounts are not cardboard, they are acid-free
cotton (the best material for archiving)
- For color enhancement: Always use a polarizer filter... Kodachrome
was designed to use with to enhance all colors across the spectrum
is desired... Kodachrome is neutral...
- As for a quality lab: That's a different story. We used to use
a lab out in Dallas TX USA, who always came through... As far
as we know, it is not the chemicals used but the time and accuracy/complexity
involved in processing(dyeing each color layer etc.). 15 years
ago Kodak said it cost over 5 million dollars for each machine
and the parts to fix were hand machined...
Here
is a link http://www.binbooks.com/books/photo/i/l/58F36AF6E2 maybe it's accurate???
Once you use kodachome(if processed properly) you won't want to use
anything else...
Kodak does list several labs around the world who still do it http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier.jhtml?pq-path=9/543/1095/1102/1147&pq-locale=en_US
Misc. Films
- Ilford Delta Pan 100 - I like this
film. I took a shot of my friend Ted competing in the Coquitlam
Highland games a few years ago with this film. The conditions were
very high contrast as most of the events were in the afternoon with
only modest cloud cover. One shot of Ted had him rubbing his hands
with some Stickum as he approached me. His attention got attracted
to something happening on the competition field so he had his head
turned just slightly away from me. I took a shot of him in mid stride
and captured a serious yet determined (some say mean) look on his
face. The resulting print gave him raccoon eyes due to the afternoon
sun and shadows caused by it but the shot still had something to
it. I enlarged it to 11x14 and framed it and gave it to him as part
of my wedding gift to him and his wife Doreen. He was very appreciative
and it now has a place of honor on his living room wall.
The 11x14 print came out quite well considering
I handheld my F70 camera for the shot (35-70mm 2.8 lens used). If
I knew more about photography when I took the shot, I probably would
have used my flash to lower the contrast but then it might have
robbed a bit of the mystery to the shot.
I think a large part of the good qualities
to this film was because a different processor developed it then
my usual pro lab. Different paper perhaps and different standards
to the developing maybe. I liked the results from the Ilford film
enough to buy the 50 speed B&W film and try it out at the Grand
Canyon. I had it developed by my regular lab and the results were
not as satisfactory. When you don’t do your own developing and printing
for B&W, it can be hit and miss for getting good results. And
for those that want to know, my regular processor at this time was
Customcolour, not a lab known for high quality B&W output.
- Ilford Delta 3200 - What a fantastic
film! I had never appreciated what super fast films could do for
creative exposures until my friend Birt gave me a few rolls of this
to try out. Amazing to be able to shoot indoor portraits with the
Bronica at f8 and 1/60 of a second. And because it's black and white
there's no concern for color cast from the indoor lights. BUT do
be careful what type of developer is used. I had one roll processed
and printed at Customcolor and the results were not as good as a
subsequent roll done by Abbott and Tincombe. A&T's prints were
quite smooth compared to the very course looking prints from CC.
I can think of some unique looks with this film for candids using
my Bronica and a long lens to keep my distance and reduce depth
of field AND without having the subject aware of my taking their
pictures.
Link to Ilford
- Agfa Scala 200 - I really like this
film, however, I don’t shoot it anymore because it’s a hassle to
process the film in Vancouver. Because Scala 200 is a B&W slide
film, it needs special processing and that special processing is
not available in Vancouver. All Scala films have to be sent to Toronto
for processing and then shipped back to place of origin.
Now this would be fine if most places would
accept the film and send it to Hogtown for you. All Kodachrome films
have to be shipped to Toronto for processing too as Kodak has closed
every outlet capable of processing the film in Canada. I’ve been
told that all Kodachrome films are actually sent to New York now.
But anyway, be that as it may, you can walk into a lot of places
in Vancouver who will handle the processed paid Kodachrome for you.
With Agfa’s Scala, only one pro lab will handle
the film as it is the only one in town that is authorized to ship
Scala to Toronto. This Lab is out of the way for me and as much
as I like the Agfa film, I don’t like it enough to make special
trips to process it. After I finish off my last rolls of Kodachrome,
I won’t be shooting it anymore for the same reasons. I can have
a roll of Velvia or any other E-6 type film processed over night
locally instead of waiting 2 weeks for a roll of Kodachrome to come
back.
- Agfa Portrait 160 - I have only
used this film once also and I wasn’t even taking the photos with
it. It was during the day of my wedding banquet and I handed over
my F90x (35-70mm 2.8 and SB 26 flash) kit to my brother-in-law Kelly,
to take some shots for us in the oft used Q.E. Park for the group
pictures. The Agfa Portrait 160 was recommended to me as being a
good, low contrast film to use so I went with it for the outdoor
shots.
The film has a very unique quality to it that
I’ve not found with any other film. Fuji NPS 160 is probably closest
to its character but I find that NPS 160 is more natural in the
way it renders a scene. The Agfa film gives everyone a pasty white
complexion, which is not necessarily a bad thing at times but it
just isn’t natural. I was struck by the blue sky of the prints from
the Agfa film. The film is low contrast enough that it can capture
the blue sky without giving up detail in the shadows but again,
it just isn’t natural.
Velvia is often criticized for having garish,
cartoonish colors but the Agfa Portrait 160 is the closest I’ve
come across for cartoon like colors. I obviously do not use it anymore
for shoots.
Link to Agfa
Where
I have my films processed
- I
go to G. King Photo on 15th and Cambie whenever I shoot a wedding
myself, however, when I shoot for Elan Photography, the owner has
used a few different places in search of the Holy Grail of excellent
processing and printing at good prices. He's tried ABC, the Lab
and is now at Customcolour, which was the place I use to go for
my own wedding shoots.
I had some minor problems in the past with Customcolor for color
negative work and hence my choice of G. King nowadays, however,
Customcolor does offer some interesting services at very competitive
prices. Messy borders can be applied at no extra cost and the sharpness
of the proof prints is quite good.
- I
still use Customcolor for all of my E-6 films more for convenience
than for absolute quality. My problems with Customcolor had more
to do with the printing stages than for film processing, so I have
less qualms about sending Customcolor my slide films. Lens and Shutter,
the local chain that has the same owner as Customcolour, is located
conveniently in Pacific Centre Mall, which my office tower has indoor
access to in the downtown core. I can just drop off my E-6 rolls
at Lens and Shutter on my morning break and receive the processed
rolls of 120 or 35mm slides the next day at lunch time.
Customcolour and Lens and Shutter also have really nice deals on
processing included rolls of film. They take the most popular emulsions
and package a two-day processing and printing service with it at
a good savings over buying the film and its processing separately.
They also have most popular slide films with processing services
packaged in too.
- G.
King has a full range of services for enlargements, from Epson Archival
printing to digital Lightjet as well as traditional chemical printing.
It's the place I would go to for print enlargements. I would not
use Customcolour for enlargements because their quality is spotty
and likely dependent upon who is handling the print job on any given
day. Customcolour only does digital enlargements through a Kodak
LED printer and as I said, quality is spotty.
- ABC
Colour Photo is quite good for traditional enlargements with craftsmen
working in the lab for literally decades. ABC also does execellent
medium format processing.
- B&W
work is not something I do much of but if I were really serious
about it, I would use Abbott & Tincombe for excellent and exclusive
b&w processing and printing. Rocket Reproductions and Spotty
Dog are other places mentioned as being good places to go for b&w
work.
Link
to Agfa
Canada, Fuji
Film Canada, or Kodak
Readers
Comments
Just
wanted to share what I learned about shooting film while on a cruise
vacation: Be careful!
I
took a range of films: 200, 400 and 800 (mix of Fuji and Kodak)
for a three week vacation to Hawaii, including a 7-day cruise.
I did not know this before hand, but here's what I learned (the
hard way).
-
US Customs can arbitrarily mark you for special inspection before
they admit your baggage. All of our baggage (check-in and carry-on)
were x-rayed (no doubt the high powered stuff) at Pearson International
in Toronto by US Customs. All carry-on bags are x-rayed each time you board a cruise ship.
So, if you are going on shore excursions, all of your film will
be x-rayed when you return to the ship. After the first trip,
I resorted to carrying only what I thought I would use that day
rather than a whole bunch of film. (They say x-ray examinations
are necessary for security, I think it's because they confiscate
any liquor you purchase ashore so you have to drink their overpriced
crap!)
- When leaving Hawaii, there is special inspection station by the
Dept. of Agriculture. All luggage is x-rayed.
- There
is another special inspection station just prior to luggage check-in.
They conduct an odour/residue test on the luggage handles, and
are equipped for x-ray as well (although we were not subject this
inspection when departing).
Including
the "normal" security check when entering the departure
terminals and airports, my film was x-rayed between 4 to 6 times.
Out
of an abundance of caution, I developed all of the film I shot in
Hawaii in Honolulu, before we returned. The damage was already evident.
The colours were off, and on the 800 speed rolls there was clear
evidence of fogging.
Thank
God I shot half my pics digitally!
Alan
T. Mak |
|
