Medium Format Forum
Register a free account now!
If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.
slide film ...
- Thread starter maarten m
- Start date
I am no expert, but I think developing slide film on your own will be difficult. I have been very happy with Fuji's slide films and used Velvia for landscape, which is just a bit too contrasty and sensitive (and hard to scan) and Provia for other stuff, which comes in ISO 100 and 400 versions. I have just shot my first roll of Astia, but it has yet to be developed. I am hoping this will approximate the color rendition and latitude of color negatives (I absolutely despise color negative film).
I really have high hopes for Astia, but we'll see.
For a first time try with slide film, I would recommend Provia.
PS: 120 slides will blow you away the first tome you view them! This is what got me into MF film.
I really have high hopes for Astia, but we'll see.
For a first time try with slide film, I would recommend Provia.
PS: 120 slides will blow you away the first tome you view them! This is what got me into MF film.
maarten m
Member
thanks mac for your reply.
why do you think developing slide-film would be difficult?
does it need some precise handling (both exposing and processing)?
i find the velvia 100 and 100F, which do you recommend?
what difference is there between the two and the astia 100F?
and where does the provia come between these two?
thanks,
maarten.
why do you think developing slide-film would be difficult?
does it need some precise handling (both exposing and processing)?
i find the velvia 100 and 100F, which do you recommend?
what difference is there between the two and the astia 100F?
and where does the provia come between these two?
thanks,
maarten.
polypal
Active Member
For processing colour film it is necessary to keep temprature of the developer within very narrow limits.
This is virtually impossible with small amounts of chemicals.
It can be done but to have a process that can be repeated you need a large installation.
With small amounts of film to be processed this will be uneconomical.
This is virtually impossible with small amounts of chemicals.
It can be done but to have a process that can be repeated you need a large installation.
With small amounts of film to be processed this will be uneconomical.
cs_foto
Member
I'll recommend velvia 100, i've tried them all, the 100 is a traditional emultion (still modern as the real traditional one is velvia50) so the 100F in theory has finer grain but i found it a bit dull (compared to)
from the 3 options, i prefer velvia 50
the provia 100 is the most boring slide film out there: you will be better shooting digital.....
kodak range is pretty nice to try as well. 100G is pretty nice.
cs_foto
Member
and most importantly HOT!
I liked Kodak E100vs and Fuji Velvia for landscapes and architecture and found Provia very pleasing for people.
I developed my own E6 in 120 and 4x5 using a Jobo CPE rotory developer. I only ruined one roll and learned quickly after that. It is time consuming to develop, but very rewarding to pull the finished slides out of the tank. There really is no push or pull for color slide film, you get what you shoot.
Then I went digital......... now I am starting back with B/W. Life really is a big circle!
I developed my own E6 in 120 and 4x5 using a Jobo CPE rotory developer. I only ruined one roll and learned quickly after that. It is time consuming to develop, but very rewarding to pull the finished slides out of the tank. There really is no push or pull for color slide film, you get what you shoot.
Then I went digital......... now I am starting back with B/W. Life really is a big circle!
simonpg
Active Member
Maarten,
I mostly shoot slide film 6x6 except the occasional Portra NC 160 and now the wonderful Ektar 100 negative films.
I stopped using Velvia 3 years ago after some frustration with colour casts in different early morning and late afternoon light. But what I disliked most was the "chocolate box" look of the heavy saturation in Velvia - just too unnatural for my eyes. So I did shoot Provia (natural saturation) for a while but found it too cool!
Then I was introduced to Kodak 100G, 100GX and 100VS - SENSATIONAL films. They are quite natural although the 100GX is warmer than the 100VS and the G. The grain of these films is fantastically fine. My favourite is 100Vs and 100GX for late afternoon. They also scan very well.
Kodak's web site has a huge amount of ionformation about each.
Try a roll of a number of films and see which appeal to your eyes.
I mostly shoot slide film 6x6 except the occasional Portra NC 160 and now the wonderful Ektar 100 negative films.
I stopped using Velvia 3 years ago after some frustration with colour casts in different early morning and late afternoon light. But what I disliked most was the "chocolate box" look of the heavy saturation in Velvia - just too unnatural for my eyes. So I did shoot Provia (natural saturation) for a while but found it too cool!
Then I was introduced to Kodak 100G, 100GX and 100VS - SENSATIONAL films. They are quite natural although the 100GX is warmer than the 100VS and the G. The grain of these films is fantastically fine. My favourite is 100Vs and 100GX for late afternoon. They also scan very well.
Kodak's web site has a huge amount of ionformation about each.
Try a roll of a number of films and see which appeal to your eyes.
Emilio Esplanar
New Member
Astia is great. It offers natural colors and a high latitude (for a slide film) combined with very fine grain. I would recommend this film for a beginner, as it is more easy to expose than Velvia due to its broad latitude. Velvia (50, 100, 100F) offers highly saturated colors, but is also very contrasty and you have to be careful not to blow out highlights or lose shadow detail completely. I can recommend Astia for nearly all purposes, especially portraiture, whereas Velvia is great for flowers or landscapes in fall to even intensify the colors.
Albion.Bowers
New Member
processing slide film...
Hello all,
My first post here. I started doing E4 processing at home in 1973. E4 was a rather complex process that required VERY tight control of temp (+/- 0.5 deg F). We would usually spool up 4 rolls at a time into a large tank (stainless was easier for me to handle, though some friends did okay with plastic reels). We would keep the chemicals in a large water bath for uniform temp, and we would add a little hot water from time to time to maintain the temp through the process. As I recall it would take about 90 minutes and there were about 16 steps.
Later we switched to E6 and it was MUCH easier! E6 would allow temp variation of about 1.5 deg F and took 37 minutes (remember reading how much easier it was). About 10 steps.
I have noticed that my E6 rolls from the 1970s are much more archival than E4. Though neither are anything like Kodachrome. When Kodak supplied Kodachrome (KRP120) it was great. As long as you didn't have any strong reds (it was always too strong on red) the colors were very good.
I have a strong bias towards Ektachrome, because its blue rendition is very good. In shooting vast expanses of water or sky, I still find it very pleasing. My feeling is that Fuji works well with greens (like forest canopies).
I am in the process of switching to digital for the Hasselblad (Phase One), so I will be learning color gamuts all over again...
Best regards,
Al Bowers
Hello all,
My first post here. I started doing E4 processing at home in 1973. E4 was a rather complex process that required VERY tight control of temp (+/- 0.5 deg F). We would usually spool up 4 rolls at a time into a large tank (stainless was easier for me to handle, though some friends did okay with plastic reels). We would keep the chemicals in a large water bath for uniform temp, and we would add a little hot water from time to time to maintain the temp through the process. As I recall it would take about 90 minutes and there were about 16 steps.
Later we switched to E6 and it was MUCH easier! E6 would allow temp variation of about 1.5 deg F and took 37 minutes (remember reading how much easier it was). About 10 steps.
I have noticed that my E6 rolls from the 1970s are much more archival than E4. Though neither are anything like Kodachrome. When Kodak supplied Kodachrome (KRP120) it was great. As long as you didn't have any strong reds (it was always too strong on red) the colors were very good.
I have a strong bias towards Ektachrome, because its blue rendition is very good. In shooting vast expanses of water or sky, I still find it very pleasing. My feeling is that Fuji works well with greens (like forest canopies).
I am in the process of switching to digital for the Hasselblad (Phase One), so I will be learning color gamuts all over again...
Best regards,
Al Bowers
wbulte
Active Member
Ektachrome Infrared was also E4 if I remember correctly. When it was slowly dying you could only get E4 processed in 1 place in Europe, later only in the US I think. The good thing is that Kodak did all that for the same price
Ah... no more EIR :-(
Wilko
john_r_smith
Member
You can do your own E6 processing at home without issues, I did for several years back in the 1980s. As mentioned above, you just use a water bath (I used a washing-up bowl!), and you need a good accurate thermometer. You float all the chemistry and the dev tank in the bath, bring it up to temp from a kettle, and top it up a bit from time to time as you go through the process. My first roll was perfect (Ektachrome), and it always worked. The slides are still good now, 25 years later.
John
John
cs_foto
Member
john_r_smith
Member
Ah, C41 now that's a different animal. Much more tricky, don't bother trying it at home. A lab is so cheap there is no point.
John
John