Graybeard
Longtime IIIf User
In the 1960's, when I shot color it was transparency film because of the cost savings over color prints (Leica IIIc - Serenar 50mm/f1.8). Last winter, I copied my slides from those days (nearly a thousand, I did some editing to what is now the family archive) onto color print film and have also made some B&W negatives from them.
While I enjoy the projected images from the slides (neither my Kodachromes or Ektachromes have faded - the Agfachromes have faded a great deal) it is awkward to set up a projector when I want to show to photographs. I do shoot slides currently, but only with a Stereo Realist and we use a Stereo Viewer with those.
I actually shoot very little color other than with the Realist and very much enjoy the time I spend in the darkroom with B&W (a nice pair of Focomats there)
So my question is: if you are using transparency film, why, and who is your audience? How do you present the images?
While I enjoy the projected images from the slides (neither my Kodachromes or Ektachromes have faded - the Agfachromes have faded a great deal) it is awkward to set up a projector when I want to show to photographs. I do shoot slides currently, but only with a Stereo Realist and we use a Stereo Viewer with those.
I actually shoot very little color other than with the Realist and very much enjoy the time I spend in the darkroom with B&W (a nice pair of Focomats there)
So my question is: if you are using transparency film, why, and who is your audience? How do you present the images?
kully
Happy Snapper
Hallo Graybeard,
For me - it's seeing those slides projected - nothing beats that. But I am wondering whether digital projectors have 'caught up'.
The other reason is scanning, much better for getting the colours right without fiddling about (as I have to do with C41 film).
For me - it's seeing those slides projected - nothing beats that. But I am wondering whether digital projectors have 'caught up'.
The other reason is scanning, much better for getting the colours right without fiddling about (as I have to do with C41 film).
rogue_designer
Reciprocity Failure
I shoot some slides - mostly for special purpose work. ie. I need/want a specific look, or in the case of provia 400f - I'm pushing it up to 3,200 and need its reciprocity characteristics.
I'm usually scanning and printing. MF and LF chromes I sometimes have Type R or Cibachrome printed. Otherwise it's all digital prints from scans - and the color negative film (aside from those special uses) gives me more control here.
I don't even own a projector anymore - and I'm not the least bit sad about it.
I'm usually scanning and printing. MF and LF chromes I sometimes have Type R or Cibachrome printed. Otherwise it's all digital prints from scans - and the color negative film (aside from those special uses) gives me more control here.
I don't even own a projector anymore - and I'm not the least bit sad about it.
oscroft
Veteran
In the past I shot slid film simply because Kodachrome was so much better than any print film - better colour, contrast and resolution. And even though there are some excellent print films these days, I still think that slide film has the edge - it certainly seems to hold a better contrast range than print film.
These days I usually present my slides as digital scans, but I do still like to get the projector out every now and then - you really can't beat a projected slide for sheer impact.
These days I usually present my slides as digital scans, but I do still like to get the projector out every now and then - you really can't beat a projected slide for sheer impact.
Morca007
Matt
The first film I shot was slide, but that was only because that was all we had. It was left over from when my father was doing sports photography.
Cost keeps me from using it these days.
Cost keeps me from using it these days.
photogdave
Shops local
I'll quote myself from another thread:
It's so great to be able to view my slides as big as I like in my $200 Kodak projector instead of having to shell out $4000 for a near-photo quality digital one. I still haven't seen a digital projector be able give me as nice a projection as a well-exposed slide!
Then I can scan the same slides with my Minolta Scan Multi (does up to 6x9 format), post them here or make inkjet prints at home, or higher quality prints at the lab. Oh yeah, I can still get Cibachromes done if I want too, although that is becoming more rare.
Finally, all my slides are easy to find any time, stored as they are in their neat little binders.
I'll also add that I find slides give me better scans than I can get off neg film. So all-in-all I find shooting slides for colour simply to be more versatile and I just like the look better!
__________________
It's so great to be able to view my slides as big as I like in my $200 Kodak projector instead of having to shell out $4000 for a near-photo quality digital one. I still haven't seen a digital projector be able give me as nice a projection as a well-exposed slide!
Then I can scan the same slides with my Minolta Scan Multi (does up to 6x9 format), post them here or make inkjet prints at home, or higher quality prints at the lab. Oh yeah, I can still get Cibachromes done if I want too, although that is becoming more rare.
Finally, all my slides are easy to find any time, stored as they are in their neat little binders.
I'll also add that I find slides give me better scans than I can get off neg film. So all-in-all I find shooting slides for colour simply to be more versatile and I just like the look better!
__________________
sepiareverb
genius and moron
I'm shooting slides for the occasional 'slide show', one of my fondest memories from childhood. I recently got several trays worth of slides my father shot back in the 60's and 70's, they are still in very good shape. My silver Contax T2 currently has the last roll of Agfa RSX 200 in it, then it will go back to Kodachrome, the usual food I give it.
sooner
Well-known
I shoot a mix of slides, b&w negative, Scala, and very occasionally color print film, and some digital, too. I love slides and fear they are next to go from the shelves. I love the look, whether projected or not, and want to give my sons the same joy I have from looking at a slide of myself as a little boy and seeing the gleam in my eye, something you just don't get from print film.
David Goldfarb
Well-known
I shoot slides because I like slide films. 35mm slides are easy to edit and sort. I project sometimes. I used to make Cibachromes and I've been thinking of going back to that medium. I've also sometimes had work drum scanned for LightJet or Chromira prints.
I have a Leica P150 for 35mm and I picked up a Beseler Slide King to project medium format slides a while back. If you've never seen a medium format slide projected, it's really something special. The Slide King, though, uses lantern sized mounts, which are non-standard for medium format, so I've cut a few slide mounts by hand from 4-ply mat board to test the concept, and I think I'll have some made up for 6x7, horizontal and vertical, by one of those outfits that cuts mats to size.
Occasionally I use slides in lectures (I'm a literature professor, and occasionally I discuss topics relating to visual art). I prefer 35mm slides to digital, because the resolution is much better, but at conferences and such, they're usually more likely to be set up for digital slideshows and Power Point, so I can do that too.
I have a Leica P150 for 35mm and I picked up a Beseler Slide King to project medium format slides a while back. If you've never seen a medium format slide projected, it's really something special. The Slide King, though, uses lantern sized mounts, which are non-standard for medium format, so I've cut a few slide mounts by hand from 4-ply mat board to test the concept, and I think I'll have some made up for 6x7, horizontal and vertical, by one of those outfits that cuts mats to size.
Occasionally I use slides in lectures (I'm a literature professor, and occasionally I discuss topics relating to visual art). I prefer 35mm slides to digital, because the resolution is much better, but at conferences and such, they're usually more likely to be set up for digital slideshows and Power Point, so I can do that too.
Luddite Frank
Well-known
Why slides ?
Why slides ?
When I first started shooting 35mm, circa 1980, it was with my Dad's Nikon S (with Dad hovering over my shoulder !).
Dad shot two kinds of film: Tri-X 400 or Kodachrome. We still have hundreds of slides he shot between 1962 & 1975, and they still look great as far as color balance and retention go.
By 1983, I had my own 35mm - an Argus C-3, then by 1985, a Retina IIIc.
I like to shoot color, so I usually shot Kodachrome 64 or Ektachrome, if I needed the speed for low-light.
My mother began pursuing photography as an adult, at the local community college, and her instructors always preferred shooting slides for color work; they felt it gave better repro, and if you had an image or two that were really outstanding, you could have them printed.
We have a variety of slide projectors; Argus with the cracker-box magazines, GAF carousel, and finally, a Kodak Carousel.
They do look really good on a decent screen; nice color, sharp image.
I work a fair amount with digital projectors and power-point projection at the performing arts center where I'm employed, and I get tired of seeing grainy, pixiliated digital images or lap-top presentations that seize-up into tiny squares, like one of Dali's "nuclear de-construction" paintings... (later work).
I haven't shot any slides since about 1990, but I recently un-earthed a couple boxes that I had shot around 1986, with my Retina, and was impressed by how good the image quality was ( composition notwithstanding; still working on that skill !
)
I think part of the allure of slides are the memories associated with them...
For my in-laws' 50 th wedding annivesary a few years back, my wife had her dad's Kodachromes (shot w/ Argus C-3) transferred to DVD, and made into a slide show that played on a TV continuously during the party.
We previewed all those slides on her dad's old Argus projector... they still looked mighty good after 40 + years...
I think we might get better processing with slide film too... I haven't been too impressed with the local color labs for my Kodacolor prints lately...
LF
Why slides ?
When I first started shooting 35mm, circa 1980, it was with my Dad's Nikon S (with Dad hovering over my shoulder !).
Dad shot two kinds of film: Tri-X 400 or Kodachrome. We still have hundreds of slides he shot between 1962 & 1975, and they still look great as far as color balance and retention go.
By 1983, I had my own 35mm - an Argus C-3, then by 1985, a Retina IIIc.
I like to shoot color, so I usually shot Kodachrome 64 or Ektachrome, if I needed the speed for low-light.
My mother began pursuing photography as an adult, at the local community college, and her instructors always preferred shooting slides for color work; they felt it gave better repro, and if you had an image or two that were really outstanding, you could have them printed.
We have a variety of slide projectors; Argus with the cracker-box magazines, GAF carousel, and finally, a Kodak Carousel.
They do look really good on a decent screen; nice color, sharp image.
I work a fair amount with digital projectors and power-point projection at the performing arts center where I'm employed, and I get tired of seeing grainy, pixiliated digital images or lap-top presentations that seize-up into tiny squares, like one of Dali's "nuclear de-construction" paintings... (later work).
I haven't shot any slides since about 1990, but I recently un-earthed a couple boxes that I had shot around 1986, with my Retina, and was impressed by how good the image quality was ( composition notwithstanding; still working on that skill !
)I think part of the allure of slides are the memories associated with them...
For my in-laws' 50 th wedding annivesary a few years back, my wife had her dad's Kodachromes (shot w/ Argus C-3) transferred to DVD, and made into a slide show that played on a TV continuously during the party.
We previewed all those slides on her dad's old Argus projector... they still looked mighty good after 40 + years...
I think we might get better processing with slide film too... I haven't been too impressed with the local color labs for my Kodacolor prints lately...
LF
Last edited:
R
rovnguy
Guest
Although I shoot lots of color and B&W negative film, I still shoot Kodachrome because it gives me the best results for my landscape and still life work. It is quite demanding to work with because of its narrow latitude, but I bracket my exposures and haven't been disappointed. I also shoot lots of digital, but nothing can come close to the impact of a projected transparency. I pretty much use my OM's for the transparency work now and use the negative films in my rangefinders. I have recently acquired a real gem... a Koni-Omega Rapid MF rangefinder. It weighs a lot, but the results are impressive. Since I can only get Kodachrome in 35mm, I've started using Ektachrome in the 120 format. I am looking forward to an entire set of new adventures.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
I like viewing the strips of "positives", I think they are awesome. I've been thinking to mount the strips directly to a flat light source and hang it on the wall. I have a roll that contains boring images individually, but it's fun to see when all of them are side-by-side.
David Goldfarb
Well-known
I've occasionally displayed 8x10" transparencies in a thin 8x10" 5000K light pad. They look great, and there are light pads that are good for this purpose that aren't too costly.
chikne
Well-known
I don't but I would like to, because some of the best color stuff I've seen was mostly sot on slides..... or digital.
furcafe
Veteran
Like David Goldfarb I shoot slides because I like the peculiar look of slide film. I don't own, & don't plan on owning, a slide projector (no room in my tiny apt. to have slide shows anyway), so I scan all my E6 & Kodachrome for digital (monitor) display &/or prints. I do have a small light table, though.
I know there are good digital projectors out there, but they are astronomically expensive compared to even a run of the mill analog projector. The main problem I've encountered w/my hybrid workflow is that many slide films, particularly the denser, fine grained emulsions like Velvia & Kodachrome, simply don't scan well, @ least w/my consumer-level film scanners.
I know there are good digital projectors out there, but they are astronomically expensive compared to even a run of the mill analog projector. The main problem I've encountered w/my hybrid workflow is that many slide films, particularly the denser, fine grained emulsions like Velvia & Kodachrome, simply don't scan well, @ least w/my consumer-level film scanners.
nightfly
Well-known
I shoot slides mostly to cross process in C-41 to get grainy, contrasty negatives for scanning now. It makes color feel more like black and white to me. I do like slides though I haven't had any framed and mounted in ages. I mostly just get them developed and left un-cut for scanning.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediumstudios/sets/72157600100136772/show/
I never really got results that wowed me with color negative film but I shot a ton of slide film in South America about 10 years ago that looked awesome and I did a few sideshows of them when I got back that were fun. There's a crispness that I feel like regular negative film lacks. That said if I really shot much color, I'd probably go digital for control.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediumstudios/sets/72157600100136772/show/
I never really got results that wowed me with color negative film but I shot a ton of slide film in South America about 10 years ago that looked awesome and I did a few sideshows of them when I got back that were fun. There's a crispness that I feel like regular negative film lacks. That said if I really shot much color, I'd probably go digital for control.
V
varjag
Guest
C41 and E6 processing cost the same here. Makes no sense to shoot negs for color then.. slides are a joy to look at an quick to edit.
rumbliegeos
Well-known
Until the last two years I used slides in my teaching all the time, and I have thousands of slides from work and family. There's nothing like seeing a image with transmitted light. Now, I use digital projection in teaching, and the quality is poor compared with optical projection with a good lens. Several years ago I bought a used carousel projector and got an f2.8 Schneider lens for it: sharp slides projected with that really make most projected digital images look mushy.
So, I still shoot slides partly for quality, partly for storage and handling ease, and partly because I don't trust my ability to archive digital files over long time periods. I even occasionally produce some real anachronisms: 4X4 cm superslides that can be projected on a carousel. Think of a 35mm slide mount with a 1/4" wide mount on the edges, and everything else image. The result is not as good as the medium format slides that David mentioned, but the effect is still very cool, especially for scenics on Velvia 50. Originally designed for 127 film, but economically produced today with 645.
So, I still shoot slides partly for quality, partly for storage and handling ease, and partly because I don't trust my ability to archive digital files over long time periods. I even occasionally produce some real anachronisms: 4X4 cm superslides that can be projected on a carousel. Think of a 35mm slide mount with a 1/4" wide mount on the edges, and everything else image. The result is not as good as the medium format slides that David mentioned, but the effect is still very cool, especially for scenics on Velvia 50. Originally designed for 127 film, but economically produced today with 645.
Last edited: