The Film Thread (Red Ring not Required) A place for Analog Photography Nuts to Talk

[Rudeofus]

Originally Posted by Lizzy7

I use a couple of EOS 5s, what's the difference to the EOS3 or 1? I've always been happy with the 5 but I think one of the bodies will need replacing soon and I'm not sure what to get.

The EOS3 and the 1 have a modern 45 point AF. The EOS 3 even has eye control focus which I really like. It's a royal bummer than Canon has not made an equivalent to the EOS 3 in the digital world so far (size of a 5D, price of a 50D, 45 AF points, ECF) and one of the reasons I still stick to analog.

[kauffman v36]

i have an announcement to make, lol. i have recently aquired about 11 rolls kodachrome 64 and i couldnt have a bigger smile on my face if i wanted to. cousin has a stock at his hosue and just decided to give me some today WITH mailers, although they expire dec.31. i will have a picture of this awesome present shortly

[mehran.mo]

Originally Posted by kauffman v36

i have an announcement to make, lol. i have recently aquired about 11 rolls kodachrome 64 and i couldnt have a bigger smile on my face if i wanted to. cousin has a stock at his hosue and just decided to give me some today WITH mailers, although they expire dec.31. i will have a picture of this awesome present shortly

if they've been in a fridge and you keep them in a fridge they should last a lot longer.. but I donno when dwayne stops processing these.

[bjordan]

Originally Posted by mehran.mo

if they've been in a fridge and you keep them in a fridge they should last a lot longer.. but I donno when dwayne stops processing these.

December 31, 2010.

[kauffman v36]

exactly. thats what i meant by expiring.

[René Damkot]

Originally Posted by kauffman v36

precisely, high temp is equivalent to too much light, hence over exposure.

When developing, not when in camera.

A film degrades faster when at high temperature, that's why pro film is kept in a fridge or cooler: At the factory, it's allowed to "ripen" until "good", then it's refrigerated to keep it stable. Consumer film is shipped out of the factory "too soon" and is expected to "ripen" om the shelf of the store selling it.

Film has the tendency to age different for different color layers, so you'll get a cast on slides. For negative film the problem is smaller, B&W film obviously won't have that problem at all

If it's B&W, I'd guess the film is fine.

Here is a link that might be interesting. Also follow the link on boiling film.

[kauffman v36]

yes i understand but i am under the impression that if film is left in the sun for an extended amount of time it goes bad.being a previous chemistry major i can say that light and heat are very much similar so it the idea wouldnt be to far fetched

[bjordan]

Well, I went out and took street shots with the cooked roll, but I've temporarily lost my drying space to a sick cat... cat hair is incredibly invasive stuff. Hopefully I can develop it this weekend.

[René Damkot]

Curious for the results

[Rudeofus]

A quick question to all the film shooters out there who develop color slides: how critical is the number of films you can develop with a certain amount of developer? My setup is ideal for 500ml (good for 6 rolls according to Tetenal instructions), but now I came back from my vacation trip with 7 exposed rolls of film. Is it a big no no to toss a 7th roll into that developer bath or will it yield acceptable results (assuming I add some minutes to developing time)? How far can I stretch an amount of developer beyond what the instructions say?

[DStanic]

This may be a stupid question but i thought i would ask in this thread rather then starting a new one. Is there REALLY a big difference between "expensive" film and stuff you can buy at walmart (ie Kodak Ultramax 400)? I bought a 5 pack of the 400 and so far I've been kinda dissapointed with the washed out looking photos. I know some of this is my fault (last shoot i was in crappy light and pushing my 85mm to the limits) as well as getting it developed in the 1hr photo at the supermarket. Will I notice a remarkable difference if I get better film and go to Black's or someplace better for develop? Will they be sharper?

Maybe I should buy a roll or 2 of some good B&W film and see how that goes...

[Rudeofus]

Originally Posted by DStanic

This may be a stupid question but i thought i would ask in this thread rather then starting a new one. Is there REALLY a big difference between "expensive" film and stuff you can buy at walmart (ie Kodak Ultramax 400)? I bought a 5 pack of the 400 and so far I've been kinda dissapointed with the washed out looking photos. I know some of this is my fault (last shoot i was in crappy light and pushing my 85mm to the limits) as well as getting it developed in the 1hr photo at the supermarket. Will I notice a remarkable difference if I get better film and go to Black's or someplace better for develop? Will they be sharper?

Maybe I should buy a roll or 2 of some good B&W film and see how that goes...

I am surprized the pics came out with poor contrast from that 1h shop. Usually they do a lot of automated post processing to make those images look good. With negatives saw a huge difference between pics I scanned in myself and pics scanned by 1h photo shops, and generally my scans looked pretty poor right out of my scanner. When I switched to slide film these differences all but disappeared, suddenly my own scans started looking good.

So my recommendation would be you switch to slide film, I highly recommend Kodaks E100VS and Fujis Provia 400X. Don't worry about all those ancient posts you read about critical exposure or lack of latitude, exposure meters in modern cameras (and by that I mean starting late 90ies) are very good at judging proper exposure.

[breal101]

Originally Posted by DStanic

This may be a stupid question but i thought i would ask in this thread rather then starting a new one. Is there REALLY a big difference between "expensive" film and stuff you can buy at walmart (ie Kodak Ultramax 400)? I bought a 5 pack of the 400 and so far I've been kinda dissapointed with the washed out looking photos. I know some of this is my fault (last shoot i was in crappy light and pushing my 85mm to the limits) as well as getting it developed in the 1hr photo at the supermarket. Will I notice a remarkable difference if I get better film and go to Black's or someplace better for develop? Will they be sharper?

Maybe I should buy a roll or 2 of some good B&W film and see how that goes...

Not a stupid question, in general pro film will give better results. The biggest problem in your case probably lies with the lab. One hour processes use what we used to call hot souping in order to speed up the process, their processors reduce the development time and worse the wash time for the film and in some cases the paper as well. This results in loss of quality and archival loss. A professional lab usually uses the more standard processing machines. The key to finding a good color lab is one that stresses quality control along with having a good volume of work, in fact, volume is one of the most important factors in keeping processors in control. As for sharpness color printers can be out of focus just as the camera can, again, a matter of quality control. B&W film may be a good option as long as you take it to a place that delivers good quality processing or better yet do it yourself. It's very easy to do as long as you follow the directions for mixing the chemistry and developing the film. There is an important reason for every step of the process.

[AngryCorgi]

This thread just reminded me that I still need to send some rolls off to get processed. I have not processed/scanned any shots yet with my GW690II and I have a 35mm Ektar100 roll I need to process too. I'm looking forward to seeing the results with a cheapo Fuji 100 roll against a Fuji 160C roll I'm working on right now (2 shots left). Maybe I'll get some more puppy snaps this week to finish it off...

[rdenney]

The main difference between pro film and consumer film is that pro film is produced to the intended ultimate color balance very accurately, and is then stored in the refrigerator or freezer to keep it there. Consumer film is produced with the expectation of some shelf life (typically six months), so the color you get partly depends on its age.

I have gotten truly outstanding results in 120 roll film from Fuji Reala, which is plain-old consumer print film. In fact, it's my favorite negative film for landscapes. For people, it's a bit ruddy, and I use NPS 160 or the like to tone things down a bit.

As far as scanning being better with negatives than slides, that depends on the scanner and how well one's workflow is managed. The notion that one is superior to the other usually reveals a problem in the workflow with one or the other. For example, which of the following was made using Velvia slide film, and which was made using cheap consumer Reala print film?





No fair peeking.

Negative film compresses the scene's range into a narrower range of densities on the film than slides do, so negatives are actually easier to scan without running out of dynamic range in the scanner. (That's a hint.)

Rick "whose scanner is well-profiled, and whose screen is accurately calibrated and profiled using a hardware colorimeter" Denney