Spanik
Well-known
I have used Kodachrome 25, 64 and 200. And mine have just the same colours as those of my dad which he used in the late '50's. Crisp, sharp. All the occasional used Agfa is pink. The Ektachrome I used when Kodachrome disappeared is rather blue tinted.
I would really like to see a replacement for Provia 400x. It doesn't have to be Provia, but a high speed slide in the 400 iso range. All we have now is 50 and 100 iso. And yes, I still use 120 slide for holiday snaps (yes, I'm mad). But inside with 100 iso is just limit without a tripod. Can be done, but 1/8s at f/4 doesn't always work handheld. And even outside with the G617 on a tripod it becomes 25 resp 50 iso. So when there is the slightest wind you cannot get sharp landscapes.
But we are disgressing...
Axel
singleshooter
Yes but I´m pretty shure that won´t see this from small german Maco distributor.
So my expectations regarding the variochrome where really not this way.
Skiff
Well-known
Sorry, but no, it has not (with the exception of faster):
A slide on a light table under an excellent loupe, and slide projection with excellent projection lenses are absolutely unsurpassed in colour brillance, 3d-look, resolution (digital is very limited by the extremely low resolution of monitors and digital projectors) and colour rendition. A slide is an unique and unsurpassed photographic medium.
We've already had it in this thread:
https://www.lomography.de/films/871965536-rollei-vario-chrome/photos?order=popular&page=2
It may be a film for the 0.1 or 0.5 % of film photographers who like to take some lomo-shots from time to time.
Nothing wrong with that.
But those who prefer real slides like the Fujichromes, Ektachromes or former Agfachromes, will not consider Variochrome as a convincing alternative.
Skiff
Well-known
Two important aspects:
1. Since 1999 up until today we have the best ISO 200/24° reversal film ever made:
A film which surpassed Ektachrome E200, Elite Chrome 200, Agfachrome RSX 200, Fujichrome Sensia 200 in fineness of grain, resolution, sharpness and neutral color rendition:
Fujichrome Provia 100F exposed at ISO 200/24° and pushed one stop.
This film really is so excellent at that speed! You will have real problems in a direct comparison even in projection to tell whether you have a Provia 100F shot at box speed or one pushed one stop.
Try it! You will see, and you will not regret it.
And even exposed at ISO 400/27° and push 2 you will get very good results with Provia 100F. The flexibility and versatility of this film is astonishing.
2. Well, and you wish Provia 400X to come back. There is a chance for it: Fujifilm has said several times that if the demand is increasing again, there is a good chance that they re-introduce former films.
So if the demand for Provia 100F (and the Velvias) is increasing in the coming years, there is a good chance that Provia 400X is coming back.
So the best you can do for you, the market and the photo film scene is using Provia 100F. At box speed, pulled one stop or pushed one or two stops.
Axel
singleshooter
Pretty right. But that are additional facts. No oppositions
Who cares about statistics.. I am looking for films for my photography and I am really bored of comments like "is not this or that...".
And I feel a bit bothered by comments that "only 0.1 or 0.5%..." and your categorizing of "real slides".
May be for you...
Not my attitude. Really.
Spanik
Well-known
Shooting Provia 100 at 200 iso pushes the developnent cost by 2. As I shot about 15 rolls of 400X on a 2 week trip and figuring in the cost of Fuji film already, this isn't really a nice option. I do understand Fuji wanting more volume, but at the prices they ask there is a large difference between what they say and what they want.
brbo
Well-known
And they did that how many times in the last decade or two?
Skiff
Well-known
They did it 3x:
1. When they re-introduced Velvia 50. Original Velvia had to be stopped because some important raw materials were not available anymore.
Then Velvia 100 was introduced (based on new technology).
But Photographers asked for a film like original Velvia. And Fujifilm invested a lot and introduced Velvia 50.
That was 2007. A time when all others said "film is dead".
By the way, in the same year Fujifilm introduced Provia 400X (and Kodak discontinued several of their reversal films).
2. Neopan 400 was stopped in 2012, and re-introduced some time later. But the demand from photographers was not strong enough, so Fujifilm could not continue production.
3. Some years ago the demand for Instax was very low, and there was the danger that production could not be continued. But they decided to continue: Demand recovered and now Instax is one of the best selling photo products on the whole market (sales are more than double compared to the DSLM market).
We should not forget that all other companies have totally failed in the reversal film market.
Fujifilm is the only company which is giving us
- reversal films from fresh production at all
- reversal films of the best quality ever.
Skiff
Well-known
I've travelled a lot in several countries in the last years, and in every country I've found labs with lower costs for push processing.
Where are you living?
And self-processing is of course always an option: It is very easy to do E6 at home. And then the costs are negligible, and you have no extra costs fur pull- or push processing.
It is also the fastest option, and a lot of fun.
As Provia 400X was more expensive the Provia 100F, pushed Provia 100F is in comparison a reasonable alternative cost-wise.
And in some countries AgfaPhoto CT Precisa (which is from Provia 100F production) is only half the price of Provia 100F in 135.
All other companies have stopped production of reversal film. Fuji has to ask for the prices which are necessary to keep the lines running.
The alternative would be production stop and no film at all !
The problem is not Fujifilm.
The problem is the demand from photographers.
AlexBG
Well-known
The results on the lomography page look like the results I'm getting from old (2006) provia 100 that hasn't been cold stored.
brbo
Well-known
Velvia 50 was not reintroduced because Velvia 100 was selling like mad. Bemoaning the discontinuation of Velvia 50 and trashing the Redvia 100 brought back Velvia 50. Your suggestion that buying and pushing Provia 100F will bring back 400X is unfortunately backed by nothing.
I agree that Provia 100F pushes well (but so does 400X). It's not without cost, though. Even if you develop at home. I mostly use FujiHunt E-6 5L kit with one shot developing in Jobo 1500 series tank and found out that when doing only one roll instead of two rolls (when pushing 2 stops) gives better results (higher max density). So, at least for me, the developing costs (and time) per roll ARE higher.
If that was a reintroduction... But OK... At least it shows that you can't reliably measure the demand if you are not really into production/marketing.
Thing with Fuji is they will NEVER tell you ANYTHING. Except "we are totally committed to film" right after they discontinue yet another film. Would it kill their film business if they gave some information back to the people buying their films?!
valdas
Veteran
WOW, that should be quite expensive per roll... So how many rolls you can develop this way with 5L kit?
brbo
Well-known
You can do 40 rolls with 5L kit (2 rolls per 250ml with 1500 tank), works out to about 3 EUR per roll.
It would be 6 EUR for push2 if you want the best results. But AgfaPhoto Precisa CT 100 is available in my country for ridiculous money so all in all it's not bad at all, not much more than Portra 400 with home developing.
Thing is that if you buy short rolls of Kodak 500T it will wipe the floor with Provia 100F at high iso for a fraction of the cost.
valdas
Veteran
But those are different beasts, I mean you would not project the negative film on the wall, will you
?miha
Established
brbo
Well-known
But those are different beasts, I mean you would not project the negative film on the wall, will you
But I don't project slides on the wall either. Wouldn't even know how to do that with 4x5.
(Please, Skiff and Jan, don't take this the wrong way, but spare me with the "light table & loupe" thing, I've heard it so many times now and if it hasn't moved me I don't think it ever will)
valdas
Veteran
Sure, if you don't project then slide is not necessary altogether, in my view, negative has a lot of advantages. I only use slide film with the intent to project it - medium format looks gorgeous when projected.
HHPhoto
Well-known
That is strange.
I've never experienced that when pushing Provia 100F two stops.
Neither with the Fuji Hunt kit, nor with the Tetenal kit.
Cheers, Jan
HHPhoto
Well-known
With 4x5 sheet film you do projection principally the same way as with 135 and 120 format film: With a slide projector.
Pani in Austria is producing large format slide projectors.
And Jensen (manufacturer of a 4,5x6, 6x6, 6x7, 6x8 up to 6x9 slide projector) is currently designing a large format slide projector, too.
If you don't like the outstanding quality of a very good slide loupe, that is o.k. Definitely for me.
Of course I cannot speak for Skiff.
But for me I can say that my explanations about the wonderful quality of a slide on a lighttable under the loupe is,
that in current times lots of photographers have never seen this unique look and quality in their life.
Unfortunately the industry with their misleading marketing has brainwashed so many people to look at pictures only in the way with the worst quality:
On computer monitors.
The medium with by far the lowest resolution and the in-ability to show real half-tones.
Cheers, Jan
HHPhoto
Well-known
Reversal film has much more advantages than the outstanding and unsurpassed quality with projection:
- finer grain than colour negative film (because the bigger silver-halide crystals are removed in the reversal process and the final image is build by the finer / finest crystals)
- higher resolution
- better sharpness
- better versatility:
you can hold the slide just at a lightsource to view it, it can be viewed with a slide-viewer, with a loupe on a light box, it can be projected, you can make direct optical BW prints from it with direct positive paper, you can scan it and make excellent prints from the scan.
With negative film you just have only two options: Scan and print.
- in lots of cases you have lower overall costs, because after development you already have a finished picture; with negative film you always need either an additional scan and / or print. And both are expensive if you want quality.
In projection slide film is indeed unsurpassed. That is already valid for 135 format. And 120 is even better.
I do both
.Cheers, Jan