Film??

[Becky]

Hi again folks, another quick question I've been thinking about...

What is the most commonly used film for 35mm SLR cams? I know theres so many different types within the 35mm range I'm not entirely sure what to pick.

If I want to take black and white pictures, will this work a lot better with b&w film rather than post editing afterwards, and again, any recommendations for this type?

Are any makes noticeably better etc?

 

[Meysha]

How long's a peice of string?

There are certain films that are good at a certain thing. Like if you want a very saturated slide film get the Velvia 100F, or a Kodachrome does pretty well too. There are other films where their greatest importance is on getting skin tones correct. So it all depends on what you want to be taking photos of and how you want them to turn out.

Taking black and white photos is (I find) completely different to taking a digital colour photo and then converting it to B&W. Because on the computer you can choose which parts of the photo are blacker than the other parts etc and you can apply a different treatment to different areas of the photo.
But I guess, on a camera you can put filters on the lens to have the same sorts of effects.

Sorry I can't help you out with an actual name of a film, but go into a decent sort of camera shop and they'll help you out... but they'll want to know what you're taking photos of. eg landscapes, people etc.

Also have a look at the Fake B&W films - they're not that bad now... but I think in 35mm film, they're more expensive than true B&W.

 

[tr0gd0o0r]

for someone just starting out, from my experience, the standard bw films seem to be either Kodak's C-41 film, available just about anywhere and can be processd in a color lab. Or Kodak T-Max, which is a process yourself film. I would advise testing out a few different types and then sticking with your favorite for a while to get used to a film

 

[Rob]

What is the most commonly used film for 35mm SLR cams? I know theres so many different types within the 35mm range I'm not entirely sure what to pick.

If I want to take black and white pictures, will this work a lot better with b&w film rather than post editing afterwards, and again, any recommendations for this type? Are any makes noticeably better etc?

Hi Becky,

A suggestion for a good all round film would be Fuji Reala 100. It's a standard negative film which works well in most situations. The Kodak films tend to come out a bit red for UK taste, especially when taking pictures of people. Negative film is cheaper and quicker to get developed than slide film and has a greater light range of acceptable exposure, so it's a good place to start. 100 ISO is well suited to bright daytime stuff, and 400 for lower lighting like indoors or typical UK weather!

Black and White pictures are a matter of great debate. You can get good results converting films like Reala to B&W in Photoshop and many would be hard pressed to tell that it wasn't originally taken as so. However, there are many B&W films available, with Kodak's T-Max and Ilford's range being very popular. The downside to B&W is that most local labs won't be able to process in-house and will post your negatives away. Sometimes this can take a couple of weeks, so if patience is an issue for you, then you can consider either converting or using a "C-41" process "B&W" film. These are generally either purple, green or brown tinged, but Kodak's 400 C-41 B&W has excellent contrast and a satisfying experience. You may wish to work in PS to convert the negatives to true B&W prints though - it just depends if the tinge bothers you.

Good luck

Rob

 

[ksmattfish]

using a "C-41" process "B&W" film. These are generally either purple, green or brown tinged,

Only if the lab is printing on color paper, and the negs are way, way over or under exposed, or they just don't know what they are doing. The negs themselves are BW negs. The color cast is in the paper/printing. Some C-41 films are designed to be printed on color paper, these have an orange film base. Others are designed to be printed on BW paper, and have a fairly clear film base.

If you aren't doing the developing yourself, or taking the film to a pro lab, you probably need to stick to C-41 BW as it can be developed anywhere. If you have them printed at an econo lab you may well experience the colored BW prints Robhesketh is talking about.

Something to keep in mind about C-41 BW films is that they usually have a huge exposure latitude. Even though they are all marked ISO 400 on the box, if you read the technical sheets you'll find most can be used from ISO 100 to 800 with no change to the standard development. Some manufacturers say ISO 50 to 1600. This is a good thing if you are encountering a lot of differnt lighting situations; you can shoot indoors at ISO 400 or 800, and switch to ISO 100 or 200 when you go outside, all on the same roll. This is a bad thing if you are trying to learn exposure, because you won't notice your mistakes.

I prefer the terms "traditional BW" (BW process) and "chromogenic BW" (C-41 process) to "real" or "true" and "fake".

 

[AlmightyWa]

Traditional black and white films will also cost you more to be developed as well, usually about £9 per roll in the UK

 

[Becky]

Very lucky for me a professional photographer friend of a friend has just given a whole tonne of new professional film in a few different types.... so I have now have 50 films at my disposal! Hurrah hehe

 

[wharrison]

Becky:

I just came across this site, which is full of information regarding your film question and other photographic topics of interest. Enjoy your explorations at this site.

Even if you don't comprehend everything as this point, bookmark the link below for future reference.

Here's the link:

http://www.imx.nl/photosite/technical/indextech.html

Again, my best wishes in your photographic endeavors.

Bill