Edited by - lee_carver on 6/27/2004 3:42:28 PM

[Link]

It's worth dabbling with the consumer versions of these slide film assuming you're not doing commercial catalog shoots that require absolute color fidelity roll to roll.

Neither one is "better"; both companies' products are capable of being use for a Victoria's Secret or Walmart ad.

I really like Fujichrome Provia 100F; it's been around for a few years. Velvia 50 is nice for landscapes, sunsets, etc. I loved Kodachrome 25, but sadly they discontinued that product about five years ago.

You can't take slide film into Walmart or your local Walmart or Ritz Camera and get it processed correctly. I prefer The New Lab and Chromeworks, both in San Francisco. I've also gotten great results from A&I in LA. A&I also had a kick-ass Kodachrome line last I checked.

Good luck.

[Link]

People who develop slides at home do it A.) because they like the process and B.) it allows them to have absolute total control (like push or pull processing with their own snip tests).

If you're reasonably able to follow instructions and can keep your chemistry clean, you should have no problems developing slide film at home.

[Link]

Regardless, the CS-4000 and CS-5000 are exceptional products.

~ GaySatyr

[Link]

Personally I prefer the Fuji slide film over the Kodak versions. They seem to have a brighter color balance that works really well when shooting people.

However, it really is a matter of personal choice.

Now as far as getting a scanner vice a Canon 10D that would really depend on what you are going to be using your camera for.

I shoot both film and digital. Digital mostly now since it is so much easier to then use the pictures in articles and galleries. And even submit them to some magazines.

When I use my print film camera is when I get an image I really like I stop and take a few shots of it on film so that way I can take it even further then digital will allow.

While scanning can produce images better than 90% of today's digital cameras it is very time consumeing.

I don't process my own film. The developing process is pretty much standard and you don't usually gain or lose anything either doing it yourself or paying someone else to do it. Now making your own enlargements or scanning and correcting your own images is another thing entirely.

[Link]

Generally I like processing film at home, I probably developed like 20 or so B&W film cassetes so far. I like the idea that I can be control, because most of mine B&W films came out pleasing. Because when I give my color/negative film to the Red Rose Photo (my local photo developers) they always seem to fuck up my film by auto processing, those Islam bastards!

Right now I wanna get more involved in photography, we have a lot of fashion shows at my college and I am "official" photographer there. Basically I shoot the shows with my SLR and give the film to Red Rose Photo for developing and printing. Each show costs me $19-$29 and the prints that I get are grainy as hell, I can retouch them a bit in Photoshop but I am always dissapointed.

The thing that I need is more control, I need control and I demand it now!

When I took the photo course in School Of Visual Art (NYC), the film that I shot maybe wasnt that great but in the darkroom I always compensated and came out with great 1 hex 8 prints that always satisfied me.

I can build a home darkroom but I rather not:
1) The money can be invest in a better solution
2) I can only develop at night/while dark
3) The fumes chemical odors might harm my pets
4) My mom would be mad at me for converting the bathroom

I also want to get a powerfull lens 300mm or 400mm since I find my current 28mm-80mm as a weak lens that is good for indoor shots. I really want to shoot the girl on the beach this summer and for this reason I need to keep the distant - which requires a powerfull lens.

I tried to shoot the babes on the beach last summer and the 28-80 lens dissapointed me a lot, and then some hindu dude came to harass me how on how he took the photos of the trains in India and how he loves trains (fuck trains, get a tank!)

-Alex

[Link]

-Get rid of my current SLR, Canon EOS Rebel 2000
-Get a new SLR, Canon EOS Elan 7E or Elan 7N/Ne
-Get the flash brackets and the off-shoe cord
-Get a camera bag, I never had one and I want one
-Get a new (good) lens: primary and telezoom (300 or 400)
and
-Get a film scanner
-Get a good photo printer

[Link]

• Get rid of my current SLR, Canon EOS Rebel 2000
  ... Your current body is fine.


• Get a new SLR, Canon EOS Elan 7E or Elan 7N/Ne
  ... The Elan bodies are good, but you should spend your money on lenses and other needs first -- upgrade the body later after your hobby is paying for itself.


• Get the flash brackets and the off-shoe cord
  ... excellent for portraiture.


• Get a camera bag, I never had one and I want one
  ... certainly useful as you get more equipment - look at the Domke "J" series - I adore mine (I've both a J1 and a J2).


• Get a new (good) lens: primary and telezoom (300 or 400) and
  ... plan your lens purchases carefully - otherwise you will end up wasting a lot of money. Make do with what you have until you can afford what you determine you need. Consider buying used in good-to-very-good condition in order to save a lot of money. B&H Photo and Adorama, both right there in NYC, are excellent resources are very reliable.


• Get a film scanner
  ... Canon and Nikon both have excellent products - the new Nikon CS-5000 is probably the current leader of the pack.


• Get a good photo printer
  ... Look at the new Epson Stylus Photo R800 model.

[Link]

I'd heartily recommend looking for quality product from Canon or from Tamron or Tokina on the used market before stooping to Cambridge's products.

[Link]

I still say that "used" Canon (my first recommendation several posts ago) is the best option for buying lenses on the cheap. You are much better off with 2nd-hand pro-caliber lenses in good working condition (never mind a few cosmetic flaws) than with ones with inferior optics and mechanics.

~ GaySatyr

[Link]

I would look to find a lab that offers both machine and hand printing processing to take your lab to. That way the guy who is using the machine is an actual lab technician who will generally pay attention to each photo and change the process as required.

[Link]

So which Canon Lens would you reccomend? I know that theres USM lenses, APO lenses and L-Series lenses. Which ones would you reccomend for me? As I said I need a standard lens, telezoom lens, and I aslo interested in doing macro photos.

[Link]

Yes, but back when I shot print instead of slides or digital I used to just take my film to any old one hour lab and have it done. Especially during shows. And on occassion got prints that were not quite right.

When I would have my regular lab do them when I got home they would come out fine.

The guys back then told me that it was probably due to poor machine maintenance (ie it was dirty) and the fact that they didn't bother to look at each negative as they printed them they just used the same settings for everyone.

[Link]

I have worked with a wide array of scanners as a printer in digital labs over the years and would agree with everything GaySatyr has said.

As a digital printer I did a lot of very large scale prints and nothing can compare to a drum scanner. If you can find one used for a comparable price to a 35mm scanner it would be your best bet. That way if you ever become a professional and want a larger film format you can still scan things. That being said 35mm slide film can be enlarged a massive amount if you shoot it through a good lense. I have seen some images from Leica cameras enlarged to wall size where you can make out eyelashes.

The type of slide film you use is a personal choice. Fuji generally has higher color contrast for brighter colors. Fuji also makes several films that have specific looks like velvia. Most beginners gravitate toward Fuji films, and I use them for non-studio work. Kodak slide film E100 has been around forever. Kodak films reproduce color more accurately, so what you see through the lense is closer to what you get. This is very nice when scanning images because you can always add contrast. If you are using the computer for color correction or if you need a higher degree of color accuracy I would use Kodak slide film.

When scanning 35mm film the largest amount of data, barring slide film, is usually about 30mb. Anything above that and the pixels are smaller than the film grain.

a 100mb file will enlarge to about any size you can dream of.

You mentioned getting a new camera body, I would consider buying two or three very nice lenses for your current body.

As a wedding photographer for a few years, nothing is more useful for photographing people in a fast paced environment than a flash bracket. Some allow you to bounce the flash off of a ceiling, this softens the light even more.

And finally, I wouldn't buy a camera bag. I have had several and have always been disappointed. I use hard aluminum cases. They are heavier and harder to lug around but they protect your expensive gear very well. They are easier to pack into a car, because they stack and you don't have to worry about their contents being damaged. They also look very professional, looks are very important if you want people to hire you.

[Link]

I'm considering the Minolta Dimage Scan Dual III, any comments?

Oh and this would have to work under Mac OS X.

[Link]

Also all the scanners Gay-satyr mentioned should be able to scan a negative strip of up to 5-6 pictures and most of them have optional adapters in which you can scan a roll of uncut film or a stack of slides you would just have to look at which one has the options you are most interested in.

oreb - I too use B&H a lot. Though I would prefer if they stopped shipping via UPS.

Alex -

I have a Domke bag as well but like oreb I almost use my hard Pelican cases exclusively now a days. The main thing is what you are going to be using the bag for and how much traveling you are going to do with it. For the most part the cost of either a good hard side case and a soft side bag can be about the same.

While I love my bracket (Stroboframe) I would caution you to plan accordingly when making a decision in this area. What myself and a few other Nikon shooters I know have recently found out is that the newer battery packs for Nikon digital cameras combined with the sync cord on top the camera make it taller than any flip frame we have currently be able to locate. So I would do a little research in this area (even if you don't currently plan to get a battery pack for your camera) to make sure you get a frame that will still meet your needs as your camera set-up changes.

[Link]

Try using some prime lenses instead of the kit 28-80 lens. Canon has a 50mm 1.8 lens that's dirt cheap new (or used). Dirt cheap made too but once you get your pics back, you'll be shocked at how much better primes are better than zooms.

[Link]

I just got myself a Stroboframe bracket, I just need to get an AT plate for it, camera wobbles.

Why Domke? THey seem to have like standard bags with no padding.

morbidthoughts-

I use high conrast/vivid film by Kodak and Fujifilm.

But primes dont give zoom.

[Link]

If you plan to shoot people, you may want to consider portrait film if the shoot is really important.

[Link]

For bags - if you decide to go with a bag, the Domke is nice, but I've gotten used to the Koa camera bags. They're fairly similar in price to the Domke.

[Link]

Jules Jordan and Jonni Darkko do take digital, but a large majority of their stills are still chrome, and I am not 100% sure, but I think that all of the pics on their boxcovers are chrome.

Rocco went digital for a couple of movies, but went back to chrome when he wasn't very happy with the results for his boxcovers.

Between our directors, we have Nikon, Canon and Olympus digitals, but still stick with chrome.

[Link]

And, do you develop the film in-house?

Edited by - alexpanzer on 6/28/2004 5:15:05 PM

[Link]

I should be getting it in on thursday. Lots of negatives to feed.

Edited by - morbidthoughts on 11/17/2004 2:24:16 AM

[Link]