Print film--what's good today?

I used to be fond of Kodak's Ektar film, and I think I have used Royal Gold (or whatever Ektar's replacement was).

What, in today's films, would be a good choice? I'm looking for good color saturation, and of course, fine grain. Most of the photography will be outdoors in sunlight or overcast, so I'll probably stick to my usual ISO 100 film. I'd prefer to stick to Fuji or Kodak for film, as I have in the past. I don't want to dabble with slide film again, which gave me good results in the past, but is a P.I.T.A. to view.

Still haven't made a move on a film scanner. But for now, it's cheaper for me to shoot film and scan in the photos later.

 

Royal Gold has been scrapped and "replaced" with "High Definition" film by Kodak. It is only available in 200 and 400 ISO at this time.

Royal Gold 100 ISO was eliminated some time ago, and I haven't heard of any plans for "HD 100" from Kodak.

The HD seems fairly close to the Royal Gold, but it seems to have *even more* contrast than Royal Gold did. Maybe my imagination...

To me, all of the print films are now being made to look un-natural (like digital??). Oversaturated colors and tons of contrast...

Just my opinion,

Tony

 

I've had pretty good luck with FUJI film. When the local newspapers used to still use film before going digital, I asked the photographers every once in awhile what film they used-- whenever I said, "KODAK" they said, "They make film?" They all used FUJI. Then they would be more reasonable and tell me that it depended on the subject. Kodak tended to be more orange/red and FUJI more green/blue compared to a perfect film since film doesn't "see" like our eyes do....

 

Its Fuji Reala 100 for me (although I agree Fuji leans toward green/blue).
The only place you can buy it around here anymore is a decent camera shop. The local Meijer/Wal-Mart/K-Mart stores don't carry 100 speed film of any brand anymore. Grrrr.

I'd like to try some Kodak Portra 160NC (NC for neutral color) but the only way to get it is special order from companies that advertise in a photography magazine.

 

I like Fuji Reala and the new Kodak High Def 200 film...both highly recommended.

 

I've had pretty good results with Fuji 200 speed consumer grade film lately, I get the negs scanned to CD-R at a pro lab when I get the proofs. It can get a little oversaturated but not always


Ken

 

Fuji Reala is very good plus it is only £1.60 per roll.

I would still go the slide route though and for me it is Velvia 50 (though I have just started trying Velvia 100) - coupled with the new Minolta Dimage 5400 scanner and the printer of choice

All the best - Andrew

 

That's interesting--in one of the photo magazines many years ago, someone joked (?) that the films tended to look similar to the colors on their boxes. Kodak being on the red/orange side (red/yellow boxes), and Fuji with blue/green (matching their boxes).

I don't know if it's worth having the photo lab scan these to CD-R for me or not. Depends on where I go...I've been shooting digital so much that I don't even know if Kodak (or Kodalux, or Qualex, or whatever it was called) still offers processing. Since I have so much film, I really do need to get a good high-res slide/neg scanner.

My companion is looking to try some of that new Kodak C-41 B&W film in the Canon AE-1. I'll be interested to see the results...heard it has a very slight sepia cast to it.

 

I noticed that at Target last week--the film selection pales compared to what they used to carry a couple of years ago. Meijer used to be good up here also, but I try to avoid their large stores.

Fortunately, I have a really good camera shop nearby. Anyone in Detroit is probably well aware of Adray's photo department, and they now have a handful of separate satellite stores that specialize in photographic equipment only. There's an Adray store about two miles from the house. I'm sure they'd still have a good selection of film, and probably offer some quality processing. Bought my Minolta from them back in 1985, in fact.

 

Anywhere from sepia, to blue, to grey to green. Being a C41 process and being printed on color paper it appears that the color cast is correlated to whatever setting the operator cranking them out thinks looks acceptable. If you go this route you might want to take the film afterwards to a pro-lab and ask them to make the proofs as neutral as possible.

 

My wife works for a photo chain here in Canada (she's done everything... lab, counter, now at head office, plus, she takes a lot of pictures), and she sticks with Fuji. I'll ask for details regarding the shots you want to take.

 

You can't beat Fuji Reala: fine grain, excellent saturation and exposure latitude (I accidentally under-exposed an entire roll by 1/2 stop, and the pictures were still gorgeous). I haven't tried any of Kodak's new films, but you might give them a try, but it looks like their only 100 ASA film is in the Gold series, and I think the Fuji beats the pants off of it. As for B&W, Kodak no longer makes any slow films , which traditionally have finer grain than the faster ones, but Ilford still makes the Pan F if you can find it (forget Wally World, I mean a real camera store). Sadly, the digital age is killing film photography in the way that the CD brought about the demise of analog sound (with the exceptions of a few of us die-hards). I have a digital camera, but using it isn't nearly as fun as my Nikon FG-20, and I hate the fact that it waits about 1/2 second before taking the shot after I press the shutter release. I guess I'll adapt, but for the time being I'm still going to shoot film.

 

I have no problem with digital--for a lot of my uses, it saves an extra step and a helluva lot of money. My Olympus takes the photo nearly instantly. But I still like to take my "good" photos on film also. I'm looking into film scanners right now, in fact.

 

Reala is great stuff. Among the other things that have been said about it, it is very forgiving of lighting, I shoot natural light with it all the time. It also has a great ability to make large, 20X30 enlargements without worrying about grain.

You can still find 100 speed TMAX Kodak black and white film which is excellent stuff. Great small grain and amazing detail. Excellent black level gradation too.

Fuji also makes a great new black and white called Acros. It's 100 speed, and from the few roll I have shot, it seems to have nice and small grain and great detail. It's what Iwill eventually replace TMAX when I cant get it anymore.

And say what you will about digital, film still does things cant be done with digital. Of course thats just my opinion.

 

I checked out our local Meijer. Films are getting more scarce! I did notice the following in addition to the "usual suspects":

100 speed TMAX is still stocked;

Kodachrome 64 is still available (my favorite from my last major trip to the Rockies);

Kodak had another slide film (something-chrome) rated at 100;

Kodak also makes some kind of HD (high-definition) print film but, like everything else, it was only stocked in a 400 speed.

I do plan on scanning into a computer at some point, so I'd prefer to have the finest grain possible. I've always liked 100-speed film for that reason--good tradeoff.

 

Fuji Reala is the best. I use it since it was released. High color saturation combined with the best truth of color of all color print films. Slightly lower contrast than other print films. Extremely fine grain.