WoodallP
Pragmatist Barnack lover
Retro-Grouch
Veteran
I'm too lazy to go digging, but I think we just had one a couple of months ago. I do remember posting (unfavorably!) about Dwayne's, as did others.
Mackinaw
Think Different
I use AgX Imaging, in Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan. Run by Mike Lussier, who worked at Kodak back in the day. His lab is less than a two drive from my home, so service is very fast. Plus Mike does top-notch work.
Jim B.
oldhaven
Well-known
I have had good luck with Northeast Photographic. They do E6 along with other usual types and some custom work. I use them because they are a 5 minute drive away in Bath Maine. I can deliver and pick up negatives in person, but they also work by mail and other types of delivery. They have a pretty nice selection of equipment, and I get scans of my stuff sent to me on the web. I have been happy with them, though they are a (young) mom and pop place, and when the backlog gets big, like in summer, it may be ten or more day turnaround. I hope they continue to do well, and that the renewed interest in film will support this type of small business.
www.northeastphotographic.com
Northeast Photographic
Northeast Photographic is New England's premier film lab. Located in Bath, Maine, we develop and scan 35mm, medium format, 4x5, 5x7, and 8x10.
www.northeastphotographic.com
Guth
Appreciative User
Careful! Comments like that could get you banned from RFF!
Ha, as far as GAS is concerned I am quite the failure when it comes to film photo gear. I have owned just four different cameras since 1980 and not too many more lenses during this time. For that matter I’m also a failure as far as photography goes in that I have never been a high volume shooter (not even with my smartphone or the small digicams I have often carried with me). Perhaps were my creative vision better this would not have been the case.
I used to shoot slide film almost exclusively when I was younger. But later on I began shooting more and more black & white negative film. These days I will occasionally shoot a roll of slide film, but not often at all. In the past I have taken my slide film to Citizens Photo here in Portland for development.
Guth
Appreciative User
I hope so as well. The last time I spoke with the owner of Citizens Photo here in Portland about such matters he indicated that they were busier than at any other time in the past. (Citizens has been around since the late 40s.) This is due to the renewed interest in film and the closure of so many other labs.
DownUnder
Nikon Nomad
This thread made me realise (others too, I'm sure of it) how much I miss Kodachrome.
A unique film. One of a kind. Lucky those of us who got to use it during its finest era.
Ektachrome too was a one-off. Other manufacturers came close, but not quite the colors this wonderful E6 film gave.
Then they pulled the plug on our beloved Kodachrome.
I know they had their reasons, but - thanks for zilch, Kodak...
A unique film. One of a kind. Lucky those of us who got to use it during its finest era.
Ektachrome too was a one-off. Other manufacturers came close, but not quite the colors this wonderful E6 film gave.
Then they pulled the plug on our beloved Kodachrome.
I know they had their reasons, but - thanks for zilch, Kodak...
Guth
Appreciative User
On a somewhat related note, I miss the vibrancy of Cibachrome prints made from slides. I’m glad that I spluged to have a few such enlargements made of my favorite slides from my European travels.
Retro-Grouch
Veteran
We seem to be off on a processing tangent, but a few more thoughts in response to Pan's original question...
First, remember that the fastest film available is ISO 100. This might influence your camera choices, since any medium format SLR is dicey if hand-held below 1/125 second. Non-SLR's can be hand-held down to 1/30, even 1/15 if you're steady. If you tend to shoot in subdued light, and want to shoot hand-held, something like a Rollei might be best. Even so, you'll probably be carrying and using a tripod a lot more to get sufficient depth of field in many situations.
Your film choices are very limited. No one, even industry honchos, can figure out what Fuji is up to with their transparency films. Some say they have stopped manufacturing them, and whatever is hitting the shelves is part of a frozen stash that Fuji has in their warehouse. Fuji says they're experiencing "supply chain issues", the standard post-COVID excuse for all sorts of corporate incompetence or failure. Bottom line? Fuji is essentially unavailable, and those smaller on-line retailers who do have some will not respond to questions about expiration dates. Odd that the big (and reputable) guys like B&H or Adorama don't have it in stock. Which leaves us Ektachrome. I gave up on Fuji, and am now using that; there's a learning curve to every film, and particularly slide film, but I'm now quite comfortable with Ektachrome. In fact, I find it the closest thing to Kodachrome that we've had since its demise.
Filtration: If you go with Ektachrome, be aware that it has a heightened blue sensitivity. For regular daytime shooting, it's not a problem, but open shade or high altitude can present problems. I've purchase 81B filters for all of my lenses, and use them often, as I live at 7,000 feet and often go up to higher altitudes. YMMV; again, there's a learning curve. You may want to use polarizers; they're sometimes helpful, but I find they give things a very artificial look. My opinion!
Save yourself some major grief and DO NOT buy outdated film stock. You can get away with this in B&W, but not with color transparencies. Ask me how I know!
6x6 projectors for 120 slide are expensive, but an impressive experience. Before you make the investment, get a good daylight balanced (5500 K) light box and a loupe that will cover a 6x6 slide.
I don't have much to offer on the subject of scanning, since my skills are abysmal, but consensus seems to be that flatbed film scanners are more than adequate if you're not going for huge prints.
All the above is a mix of fact and opinion, but I hope I've been clear on which is which. Go for it, shoot some big slides, and enjoy!
First, remember that the fastest film available is ISO 100. This might influence your camera choices, since any medium format SLR is dicey if hand-held below 1/125 second. Non-SLR's can be hand-held down to 1/30, even 1/15 if you're steady. If you tend to shoot in subdued light, and want to shoot hand-held, something like a Rollei might be best. Even so, you'll probably be carrying and using a tripod a lot more to get sufficient depth of field in many situations.
Your film choices are very limited. No one, even industry honchos, can figure out what Fuji is up to with their transparency films. Some say they have stopped manufacturing them, and whatever is hitting the shelves is part of a frozen stash that Fuji has in their warehouse. Fuji says they're experiencing "supply chain issues", the standard post-COVID excuse for all sorts of corporate incompetence or failure. Bottom line? Fuji is essentially unavailable, and those smaller on-line retailers who do have some will not respond to questions about expiration dates. Odd that the big (and reputable) guys like B&H or Adorama don't have it in stock. Which leaves us Ektachrome. I gave up on Fuji, and am now using that; there's a learning curve to every film, and particularly slide film, but I'm now quite comfortable with Ektachrome. In fact, I find it the closest thing to Kodachrome that we've had since its demise.
Filtration: If you go with Ektachrome, be aware that it has a heightened blue sensitivity. For regular daytime shooting, it's not a problem, but open shade or high altitude can present problems. I've purchase 81B filters for all of my lenses, and use them often, as I live at 7,000 feet and often go up to higher altitudes. YMMV; again, there's a learning curve. You may want to use polarizers; they're sometimes helpful, but I find they give things a very artificial look. My opinion!
Save yourself some major grief and DO NOT buy outdated film stock. You can get away with this in B&W, but not with color transparencies. Ask me how I know!
6x6 projectors for 120 slide are expensive, but an impressive experience. Before you make the investment, get a good daylight balanced (5500 K) light box and a loupe that will cover a 6x6 slide.
I don't have much to offer on the subject of scanning, since my skills are abysmal, but consensus seems to be that flatbed film scanners are more than adequate if you're not going for huge prints.
All the above is a mix of fact and opinion, but I hope I've been clear on which is which. Go for it, shoot some big slides, and enjoy!
Evergreen States
Francine Pierre Saget (they/them)
I have a bag of various Fujichrome films in the freezer at my dad's house. I've always been intimidated by slide film. I shot a test roll each of Provia and Velvia in the mid 2010s. Finally got them developed over the last couple years. Going off the scans, I don't see the advantage over C41, but I didn't shoot them in the best lighting conditions. But at some point I might bring them out for a project, should such a project call itself to me.
Retro-Grouch
Veteran
First, a warning: Velvia 100 (and only 100; 50 is OK) can no longer be sold or processed in the US. It contains something that is environmentally very toxic. If you have any, it's essentially useless.
Second, if the intent is to shoot film and get an image into print, C41 films are of course more practical and logical. E6 is a different (and crankier) mindset, somewhat akin to shooting collodion for tintypes, or doing daguerreotypes. Of all present processes (except perhaps instant films), it has the closest indexical relationship to the subject before the lens. For me, working as a documentarian, this is important from a conceptual standpoint: knowing the film used, a viewer can look at the slide and know that this is what the subject looked like, as translated onto that film, and by extrapolation in "real life". And from the standpoint of my own approach to process, I like the discipline of being forced to shoot with the demanding technical precision that slides demand. I'm more than a bit OCD, as you may gather!
Slide films do give a different rendition from print films, though I would think that a C41 negative, containing as it sometimes does more information due to its greater latitude, can be made to look much like an E6 image.
armadsen
Established
Both B&H and Adorama continue to consistently, though infrequently, get Provia and Velvia in stock. It just sells out within an hour or less when they do. Anyway, the latest Provia I got from B&H (in mid December) has a 07/2026 expiration date.
I’m not trying to start up the discussion about whether it’s actually being made or just freezer stock, just pointing out that the “big guys” do continue to stock it, and that unexpired film does continue to exist.
Retro-Grouch
Veteran
I've been on the "stock alert" waiting list for Fuji films, with both companies, for months. I've never received an in-stock notification. Maybe you were able to purchase 35mm? I've been waiting for 120.
caila77
Well-known
I use slides too, I have some of them purchased many years ago. I devloped slides By myself until few years ago. Nowadays I use the local lab.
CMur12
Veteran
I fully understand!
Though I've taken few photos in recent times, I have shot slide film almost exclusively for over 50 years. For some time, I have shot mostly 120, in TLRs on a tripod. I love the look of a slide on a light box. In fact, there is even an art to the arrangement of slides in a page. Of course, medium format is even more impressive viewed in this manner..
I have two 35mm projectors (a Leitz and a Kodak), several viewers, a viewing screen and an editing screen, two light boxes, a high-quality, low-magnification viewing loupe for 6x6cm slides, and a high power loupe for scrutinizing details. What I don't have is a 6x6 projector. (I understand that you really need to glass-mount 6x6 slides if you plan to project them.)
I have a pretty good supply of 135 and 120 slide film in the freezer (including Fuji Velvia 100 and Velvia 100F!).
- Murray
Prest_400
Multiformat
I've never been a high volume (film) shooter till the trip I took last year. Which somehow, has made me to bump up a bit my film shooting.
I left out the un-RF part of looking for a 645 like a Pentax 645. Half frame is cool nowadays! But the auctions went expensive so back to the cycle of budgeting for more film instead (or travel). AS per the latter, I have been bitten by the travel bug and film budget does compete with a weekend somewhere in Europe locally.
I like how Retro-Grouch has some on points in the discussion
Something that might be a stupid rebuttal: The pros did it back in the day. Seemingly, I was anyways too young to actively being involved, Slide film was almost everything for publications and media. I like seeing some, now 20 year plus old images and recognizing that they were shot on slide film. Actually, I don't quite get the "it looks like digital" except for the grainlessness. Depending on exposure, slide has a specific Punch to the primary colors and specially reds.
Then also, up until the 80s where slide was about the main color media for consumers, many did manage with roughly sunny 16.
Back to our contemporary times, I think slide has a certain fear factor compared to Color neg because it cannot be overexposed 3 stops without much consequence. Also a reason why I liked Provia was to skip scanning inconsistencies by labs. Then I'd outright skip scanning, and just view the 6x9's on a backlight with pure enjoyment.
Actually I do have a couple nice rolls of Astia 35mm that have been frozen since I got them pre-pandemic, aside of shooting one for fall 2019. So it has been really long since I did 35mm slide. 120 I do, but you also bring up the great point of ISO100. I also live up north and it's worthless handheld for half of the year.
As of the processing, batching up and DIY might be a good way to go forward. The newly launched ADOX 3 bath kit can be simple, I had no problems back when it was Tetenal. For me it has been a bit easier, as we did a local photo club wide event to shoot E6, bought a kit and agreed on a common developing day for a season; so a few members could have a single roll and that makes it worth it. Last spring we did use a 6 bath kit, and despite quite some care we got some weird shifts so got a bit more respect to the process.
Richard G
Veteran
Queen’s House, Greenwich. Royal Observatory on the hill to the right. January 1984. Kodachrome 64. I was 23 with Gossen light meter. It looked just as is recorded here.
Queen's House, Greenwhich.jpg by Richard, on Flickr
Queen's House, Greenwhich.jpg by Richard, on Flickr
raydm6
Yay! Cameras! 🙈🙉🙊┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘ [◉"]
I'll have to break out my Leica Pradovit projector soon and go through a few of my own.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Some lovely photos!
It has likely been about 30 years or so since I exposed a roll of transparency film. I recall the last time was likely the first time I was in Japan, about 1992. I'd moved to color negative some time before that ... for the greater exposure latitude. Once quality digital capture happened, I stopped shooting color film entirely, but have continued to use B&W negative film in all of my film cameras (from Minox 8x11 to medium format in various formats).
I long, long ago sold my Kodak Carousel projector and slide carriers...
G
It has likely been about 30 years or so since I exposed a roll of transparency film. I recall the last time was likely the first time I was in Japan, about 1992. I'd moved to color negative some time before that ... for the greater exposure latitude. Once quality digital capture happened, I stopped shooting color film entirely, but have continued to use B&W negative film in all of my film cameras (from Minox 8x11 to medium format in various formats).
I long, long ago sold my Kodak Carousel projector and slide carriers...
G
ChrisPlatt
Thread Killer
Medium format? Been there; done that. Yes, superslides do look great. But today I use 35mm exclusively.
99% of the time ISO 100 slide film is fast enough for me, and I am satisfied with projected image quality.
Chris
99% of the time ISO 100 slide film is fast enough for me, and I am satisfied with projected image quality.
Chris