What color film for street & candid

J

jomyoot

Member
Local time
11:06 AM
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
17
I like Velvia and Atsia, but is ISO 100 too slow? How does 400H perform? What strikes a good balance between quality and speed?

I do not plan on post processing. I would like to enlarge to print on the wall.
 
Fuji 400H would be a fine place to start, see how you like it; a good all-round useful speed if you don't specifically need something faster. I use 800Z but mostly in medium format where lenses are slower, and it's great too.
 
C-41 Color Film

C-41 Color Film

I admit I haven't used the Fuji films in 400-800-1600 mainly because they are hard/impossible to find without driving halfway across Houston at rush hour. YUK!

The best C-41 film available to me is Kodak Ultra 400UC. It is by far the best film for the price and available 24/7 at Wal-Mart. 3 36 exp. rolls for $12. I have exposed it at 100-200-400 with great results. YMMV

Someday I'll make the trek across town and try some of the Fuji films.
 
I've been really happy with images from Kodak Gold 100, 200, and a Kodak 400 (now called "Kodak MAX"). The 400 really impressed me. I was led to expect something less than ideal, and honestly, I could not identify the 400ISO shots from 100ISO or 200ISO rolls based on the print alone. The nice thing is these films are readily and cheaply available pretty much anywhere you buy groceries, gas, or cigarettes. Colors are bright, accurate, and prints are very sharp and detailed. Grain is not visible in 4x6 prints.

I've never liked the images from Fuji Super HQ, which is either the Superia line or no longer around. The latter would be the best thing to happen, IMHO. I took some good images with it, but the colors were never even close to as vivid as they looked like at the time, like having a gray filter :/ Maybe just my experience.

I did shoot a few rolls of the free promotion new Kodak Portra. NC400 was similar to the Fuji Super HQ, but not as bad. The VC 400 and 160 were similar to the Kodak Gold films. Admittedly, I was not using them under controlled lighting, but for general outdoor photography.

I'd buy the Gold films over the Portra films for street photography, and the Gold films are a couple bucks cheaper to boot. I'd really hesitate before using Fuji color negative film again, given my past experience with it. Unless they've really changed it, and since I can get Kodak Gold anywhere, I just don't see any reason to bother.
 
I use Fuji Reala quite alot, though this is 100 and I rate it as such. Probably not what you're looking for as its a slow film but I thought I'd chip in simply as I like the colour reproduction. I've used velvia quite alot back in the days of pro film use but found it a little too vivid for all but the most specialised of uses.

I may well try Kodak Ultra 400UC for the more gloomy of English days as many of you seem to rate it.
 
Another plug for Reala. I shoot color print film very rarely but Reala has very vivid yet not unatural color. It much better than their cheap stuff. I was just looking into getting some to keep in my beach camera and B&H has some imported or grey market version for like $3 something a roll. Going to order some when they re-open after passover.

Does anyone know of a grainy, yet vivid color film (negative or positive) sort of the color equivalent of Tri-X? I tend to shoot positive film and cross process to bring out the grain and contrast but would love a "normal" way of getting this Ellen Von Unwerth sort of look short of $15 roll Ektachrome p800.
 
jomyoot said:
I like Velvia and Atsia, but is ISO 100 too slow? How does 400H perform? What strikes a good balance between quality and speed?

I do not plan on post processing. I would like to enlarge to print on the wall.
Click to expand...

If you are going to enlarge as prints to hang on a wall, then use color negative. The 400 and 800 films are very good nowadays. The key is not to underexpose (overexposure by a stop is still very printable and some would say it helps the shadows) and not to underdevelop. The latter is more the responsibility of the lab you take it to. Some labs in Bangkok may not be as conscientious in changing their chemistry as often as they should. Some processors there are not even hooked up to running water.
 
I go everywhere with Kodak 400 UC. I like the Fuji superia also, but for me it is a little bit red tide and needs postprocessing.
 
I get a 'color Tri-X' look with out of date (expiry 1997) Fuji Sensia II ISO100 developed in a minilab.

Other times I also use Fuji Reala ISO100 for great color.

I keep one camera loaded with Sensia, and the other with Reala. I choose which one to take for the mood I'm in and the light I'm expecting that day.

But I have plenty of light every day for ISO100, heck I could use ISO25 if it existed. When I started photography ISO125 was considered normal, now it is regarded as slow!

For night time I use the new Fuji Superia ISO1600, which gives a grittiness all by itself.

I have recently been thinking about getting some really cheap film from the Chinese shop and seeing how I can expose it to get various colors in my typical day time light.
 
For Slides, go for Kodak E-200. you can push it up to 800 and still get great results. It's expensive, but extrememly versatile. For prints, I would go with Portra 400NC. Again, very versatile and you can punch the colors up if you want or leave them subdued.
 
C41 grain isn't attractive at all, so it's good that most of them don't have much of it... Fuji Sensia or Provia 400 (slide) pushed a stop or 2 would give you a nice gritty look with color, and the white balance shouldn't go too crazy.
 
Ooops, I read that as "what colour of film" - so "black-and-white" . . . Not the most helpful contribution, my apologies !
 
I really like Reala 100 and Portra 400. I like the VC version of the portra but some may find it garish. Those films give such great color/contrast/saturation that I don't feel a need to use slide film. I do like kodachrome 64 and Velvia both, but if you want to hang a print on the wall I don't really see a reason to shy away from modern print films.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom