Why do you shoot slides?

[Waus]

Easy to scan
Beautiful colours

 

[aldobonnard]

As nowadays you'll need an expensive scanner to justify and exploit slides, in order to get them printed, and more so with the demise of Kodachrome, it makes little logic to keep using slide film, let's be honest.
But, then, I am the first to still use mostly slide films ;-) Perhaps one of the few left in Oxfordshire, UK...
Velvia 100F, Provia, Kodak E100G/GX and VS
No grain (ISO50-100), dense saturation, richness of tones, quite resistant (more robust to scratches than negatives), high resolution achieved (I use mostly summicron's).
Worth the hassle and cost, great to see them on a lightbox with a loupe.
Be prepared to spend time and a bit more money than digital-jpeg stuff.

 

[Rayt]

Aside from the slide shows I liked the way Cibachrome looked. With Kodachrome and Cibachrome gone I will stick to b/w once the rest of my E6 runs out.

 

[anjoca76]

I resisted slide film for a long time because I had always heard you had to really nail the exposure and that c41 was much more forgiving. These statements are true, but if you take an extra second to check your meter and err on the side of underexposure when in doubt, it's actually not any more difficult to shoot slides. I remember being blown away by my first set of slides: they were all very well exposed, with gorgeous colors and fine detail. I was smitten right away. Plus, I love the ease of storing mounted slides much more so than strips of negatives.

 

[HHPhoto]

When you sit and view your slides through the loupe for the first time, you will understand.

+ 10000 🙂

And especially if you look through an excellent optical loupe, like the Schneider and Rodenstock slide loupes:
http://www.schneider-kreuznach.com/foto_e/zubehoer_lupen.htm

http://www.rodenstock-photo.com/en/main/products/magnifiers/aspherical-magnifiers/

My reasons for shooting slides:

1. Projection: Absolutely unsurpassed quality (brillance, sharpness, resolution, fine grain, tonality) at that big enlargements.
I've compared slide projection with excellent projection lenses to the current most expensive beamers (2 MP; 7000€).
The result is absolutely clear: Slide projection is a league of its own. Far superior resolution and sharpness, better brillance and tonality, much better color reproduction.
The most expensive beamers can not compete at all with slide projection.
With beamers you have the situation that you pay e.g. 7000€ for a 24 MP Nikon D3x, and then you pay another 7000€ to smash this resolution down to the extrmely low resolution of 2 MP with the beamer (and the 2 MP are only valid in horizontal direction, in vertical direction you have even 40% less resolution).

2. Slide viewing with an excellent slide loupe: Outstanding quality, fast, convenient.
Viewing slides this way with a little daylight light table (like this one http://www.kaiser-fototechnik.de/en/produkte/2_1_sortiment.asp?w=381 ) is as fast as looking at prints in a photoalbum. But with better image quality.
This way you can easily show others your slides without projection.This set-up is smaller and lighter than a photoalbum or a laptop.

3. Prints have a limited contrast range of about five stops (max. contrast from deep black to shiny white on the print). There is a physical limit which cannot be surpassed.
Slides as a transparent medium can deliver higher contrast ranges. With certain (BW) slides films even more than 10 stops.
This greater max. contrast range of slides is one reason for their higher brillance.

4. With slide film you can achieve higher resolution, better sharpness and finer grain compared to color negative films.
There have been some scientific tests proving that films like Ektachrome E100G, Provia 100F, Velvia 100 and 100F, Astia 100F have about 30-40% higher resolution than Ektar 100.
I've made some comparison tests, too, and can confirm that.

5. Reliability:
What you see is what you get.
Give your slide film in 5 different labs, and you will always get the same results.
Give your CN film in five different labs and order prints from them, then you will most probably receive five different results, because the operator at the printer does an interpretation. You get differences from the scanning and from the operator of the machine, who decides about contrast and colors.

6. Most authentic form of photography: A slide is an original, the pure form, not manipulated in any form.

7. Versatility:
Slides can be viewed only with the eye, holding against light, with a loupe, they can be projected on a screen, and you can scan and print them (and currently there is still the possibility to make a Ilfochrome, or a direct print with Harman Direct Positive Paper).
Color negatives can only be printed.

8. Very cost efficient:
Color negative film makes sense if you want prints.
For a quality print I have to pay here about 35 - 40 cents depending on the lab.
A 36 exp. CN film, developed and with prints cost me more than a slide film with development.

If you consider projection than there is an even much more significant price gap: With projection my huge, brillant picture of 1m x 1,5m or 2 x 3m cost me less than 1€ in total.
A print from CN film of that size cost me much more than 100€, and doesn't have the brillance, resolution, fine grain and sharpness of the projected slide.

9. BW slides:
Their tonality is unique. Yo can not get this unique look with prints.
Once you have seen BW slides, you are hooked.

Slides, that is where film is absolutely unique and can not be replaced by CN or digital.

Cheers, Jan

 

[agour]

I love the colours and the super fine grain that velvia 50 produces. Got a pile in my fridge, havent shot any in a while though.

Also, 120 slides are a thing of true beauty to look at!

 

[HHPhoto]

I love the colours and the super fine grain that velvia 50 produces.

And Velvia 100F, Velvia 100, Provia 100F, Astia 100F and Ektacrome E100G even have finer grain than Velvia 50.
Velvia 50 is a quite old emulsion, introduced in 1990.
The other mentioned more modern films are younger, have the latest and most advanced technology and finer grain and higher resolution despite their higher speed.

Also, 120 slides are a thing of true beauty to look at!

Ever seen a medium format slide projected?
Breathtaking, you will never forget that in your life (see my comments about projection in my first post above).

Cheers, Jan

 

[funkpilz]

Because they're slides.

/thread

 

[Kent]

Colours, brilliance and because they come out the way I want them and not the way the developing machine wants them.

 

[kmallick]

Ever seen a medium format slide projected?
Breathtaking, you will never forget that in your life .

Cheers, Jan

+1. Time flies with 120 film slides projected on a white screen from Hasselblad PCP 80. I love to spend an entire evening viewing projected slides all by myself. Beats the crap out of Photoshopping and scanning!

 

[oftheherd]

Aside from the slide shows I liked the way Cibachrome looked. With Kodachrome and Cibachrome gone I will stick to b/w once the rest of my E6 runs out.

Boy, didn't Kodachrome and Cibachrome look wonderful? I only did a few Cibachrom prints some 30 years ago, but it was terrific. One day I hope to try Ilfochrome with a good E6 film. I don't expect it to be the same.

 

[stratcat]

When you sit and view your slides through the loupe for the first time, you will understand.

Most certainly... after looking at slides, color prints just look depressing

After shooting 135 slide film I just couldn't help it and had to try medium format slides... jaw dropping...

Now I need to get a nice projector...

 

[ronnies]

As others have said, I shot slides because I didn't want anyone else mucking about with my photos.. 🙂

Ronnie

 

[jpa66]

Anything that I add would be redundant. There's nothing like looking at a slide on the light table or through a loop. Also, as Jan already said, you get the complete package ( I'm paraphrasing here ).

AND, slides are less likely to be lost, as I can attest to, as my father used to take lots of pictures of us as kids. The slides all remained intact and available ( in the magazine ) but he "lost" almost all of the negatives that he took!

Jan

PS. A 4X4 slide is indeed a thing to behold.

 

[Dirk]

The color reproduction and fidelity of well-exposed slide film is still unsurpassed, in my opinion. I am partial to Astia, myself. Love the neutral colors.

 

[Rob-F]

Ever seen a medium format slide projected?
Breathtaking, you will never forget that in your life (see my comments about projection in my first post above).

+2. And 35mm slides are not that far behind! I shoot both. And I like to project my slides onto my 8 foot wide screen. It's like having Todd-AO at home. (how many today know what Todd-AO was? OK, how about 70mm Panavision, then?)

 

[charjohncarter]

This why I shoot them, not taken by me but taken with W.K. Amonette's camera: 1953:

and this taken by me; 1974:

They just look better than anything else that is color.

 

[Rayt]

Boy, didn't Kodachrome and Cibachrome look wonderful? I only did a few Cibachrom prints some 30 years ago, but it was terrific. One day I hope to try Ilfochrome with a good E6 film. I don't expect it to be the same.

I had my Cibachromes done at Holland Photo, a mail order place in Texas. I may be wrong but I think the chemicals for Ilfochrome is no longer available.

 

[Dave Jenkins]

Because I love the challenge of getting my photographs just the way I want them in-camera. Then I scan the slide and don't have to try to fix it in Photoshop. I'm sorry to say that digital has made me a sloppier photographer.

 

[Rayt]

Hi Dave Jenkins,

I love your work in Rock City Barns!

Best,
Ray