nitrogen28
Member
I just sold my DSLR and gone fully to film. I don t know how to develop film by myself so I m shooting color most of the time. As soon as I learn to develop b&w I ll shoot it more often.
I thought Kodak's cast was intended to make it a breeze for mini-labs to print on colour paper? That's too bad. When I knew I was going to be getting a new scanner (and not paying for prints from the mini-lab anymore) I switched over to Ilford XP2 because it lacks the cast on the negative. Another reason was that it also makes it possible to do wet prints down the road, should you be inclined.I said 50/50. I think I intend to shoot more BW than colour but that logistics often defeat me. I'd like to shoot real BW but don't develop my own (I know, I should change that) and am usually too impatient to have it sent out. So, I mostly shoot BW400CN, which is acceptable even if it isn't Delta 400. But I've only found one minilab which reliably processes that without nasty colour-casts, so I tend to use them - which builds in delays as I can't often get to them. With others I find it easier to get a good result doing my own BW conversion from lab scans of colour negs. (I'm trying to avoid the time taken doing my own scans, but often find I need to scan my own negs from colour-cast C-41 BW.)
Also, Fuji makes decent ISO 800 and 1600 colour film. And, finally, its often handy to have colour loaded if I only have one camera with me. For those shots that need colour, its there. And for those better in BW, well, I just convert the scans. Again, probably not quite as good as even C-41 BW but more convenient.
...Mike
Totally agree, but I can't find a reliable slide projector anywhere.