|
|
| *SoulEyes Photography>>>Landscape Photography |
Which is the best color negative film for landscape photography? |
i mean the beat print film My favorite color negative film is Agfa Ultra 50, which thanks to the fact that Agfa is owned by Bayer (aspirin) and doctors don't know squat about photography, has been "replaced" by Ultra 100. Yeah right. My second choice in negative is Fuji reala 100, professional. I have to agree with the transparency guys/gals above. I shot a very large quantity of work on the above specified negative films, as I did not have access to cibachrome printing (I prefer to print my own pictures.) Well, since I had access to a color darkroom, it worked out great for the prints, but digital has since come into its own. And negatives do not scan as well as slides. It can be done, but it is massive work, and expensive. If you want to print yourself, you can have internegatives made from the slides. Be sure they have the same dynamic range though and that the color is as good-very rarely can you get an internegative that will yeild the same results as a cibachrome print (which, btw, are better looking than prints from negs.) My favorite landscape slide film is Kodak E100VS, shot at 50 and pulled one stop in development (although you must test for the best results.) Kodachrome is wonderful film, but must be developed at a Q-lab, ie one that can do the entire 14 step process for Kodachrome (Many prolabs send it out.) Always have your film developed at a prolab-for slides its generally less expensive, and the quality is always better than sending it off from Target or wal-mart. If you don't have a prolab in your area, you can send the film to A&I in Los Angeles, or The New Lab in San Francisco. These are two of the best labs in the United States. google either of them and Fed-ex the film (lots of pros do this-guys/gals who live in areas without high end photo labs.) Good luck and good shooting, I like Fuji Professional 35 mm color Kodachrome 25 slide film. Tripod required in full sunlight, nice and thick emulsion. Print on cibachrome. Yeah, I know you said negative film, but I'm sticking with my answer. Wurm is right. When you shoot color transparency film, your colors are the closest you will ever get to the real deal. Kodachrome is known for its deep saturated colors and virtually no grain. Color negative films color is determined by a machine or an operator and unless you shoot a gray card at the beginning of each roll, neither man nor machine can nail the color. If you really have to use negative film, then Fuji is the clear choice. If you ever get the chance, compare a landscape shot on negative film to a print of a Kodachrome printed on Ciba. You may become a believer. And they are archival prints. http://www.horvath.ca/final/cibachrome.h... http://www.lightroom.com/lr_pages/ilfo_i... Fuji has more of a green shift than Kodak, and the colors are bolder. I'd go with Fuji. While Kodachrome is an excellent film, it's more expensive and harder to find someone to print from slides than from negatives, and after seeing the wonderful quality on the slide, you might be very disappointed in the finished print. Few places print on Ciba paper. It's mostly digital scans these days. On the positive side (no pun intended), Kodachromes do last a long time! I have some of my Dad's old Kodachrome slides from the early 60's, and there's virtually no fade or color shift in them. I've had my own 'chromes printed out. |
Photography Categories--Copyright/IP Policy--Contact Webmaster |