# Just dusted the film off of my Canon-need some refreshers



## Penny220 (Oct 18, 2016)

I got tired of the limitations of my phone camera knowing what can be done and I've been taking allot of pics lately so it was time to take my old setup out of storage.  I'm questioning if I should be using 200 or 400 ISO.  I shoot allot in the woods (low light) and macro (small aperture).  

Next question, is Kodak still leaning towards the blue/green and Fuji still leaning towards the reds with much thinner film?


----------



## john.margetts (Oct 19, 2016)

I use Agfa Vista (aka Fuji 200) almost always. I find 200 ISO fine up here in the UK. Down in your sunny latitudes I would have thought it enough even in the woods. Best way to be sure is to try both and see - and show us the results.


----------



## SoulfulRecover (Oct 19, 2016)

use 400, meter it as 200.

if you can use a tri-pod or pull off using 100 ISO film, try using Kodak Ektar.  Beautiful colors.

Kodak still seems to be on the cool side and Fuji on the warmer side. I have not been impressed with Fuji films other than their E6.

My typical film is Kodak Portra 160 for color in 35mm and 120, Ilford Delta 100 B&W in my 4x5, Kodak tri-x in 120, and Ilford PanF Plus in 120.


----------



## Penny220 (Oct 19, 2016)

I'm going back over 20 yrs.  Agfa was a joke.  200 was the standard, all around median...we started to use 400's when they addressed the grain issues and 1200's came out.  My knowledge is antiquated.  My knowledge goes back to flash slap, push film and advanced into machine processing where we automatically color corrected via brand of film and composition.  Getting back into this....my last experience was arguing with a lab when I requested Kodak custom and my prints came back on Fugi standard.  As I said, my knowledge is antiquated.  Kodak doesn't even do processing anymore let alone local film labs.


----------



## Penny220 (Oct 19, 2016)

SoulfulRecover said:


> use 400, meter it as 200.
> 
> if you can use a tri-pod or pull off using 100 ISO film, try using Kodak Ektar.  Beautiful colors.
> 
> ...


Apparently, not a whole lot has changed.   How bad am I screwing myself with a 400 basic kodak capturing fog at dawn or going macro?  Shots won't go into poster prints, they only need to be good enough for computer screens but I need full ap settings with zero tripod in order to pull off the shots I want.


----------



## SoulfulRecover (Oct 19, 2016)

Hmmm Im not too sure. I don't think I have ever photographed fog at dawn. For that I would shoot a roll of 400 metered at 400 but over and under expose a few shots.

take notes for each shot, ISO, f-stop, shutter speed.

develop normal and see what seems to work the best.
if youre getting shake, you can bump up to 800 speed.

If you feel like your shutter speed is slipping to low, on the first shot or two, either change your ISO setting to 800 or under expose the 400 by a stop. Then have the lab push the film 1 stop.

I guess what I am saying is; experiment haha


----------



## vintagesnaps (Oct 19, 2016)

I've done evening/sunset shots on film. I don't know what I used but probably Kodak something... Portra has lovely color by the way. I just find sunsets (since I've done those more than sunrises) push the limits of what you can do because the camera's recording light so when the light goes, that's it. I don't use a tripod, I just get balanced and stable and adjust how I'm standing and holding the camera. I tend to use 100 on nice sunny days outdoors and 400 for just about anything else (indoors, low light).

What little I ever did with fog it was shooting hockey indoors in warm weather with fog rising over the ice. I found it hard to shoot thru or focus because you can't see what you're doing with the fog obscuring everything. Since it blocks light it makes it more like shooting in lower light. On film indoors I found it tended to distort the color and everything was greenish gray, but outdoors maybe the color would be accurate.

It's not as handy getting film developed since our local camera stores closed, but I send out and have gotten good results. You might take a look at http://www.filmphotographyproject.com .


----------



## Penny220 (Oct 21, 2016)

Thanks for the tips and making me think about this more.  Where I'm shooting is a giant swimming pool with a couple of islands and tropical plants that sits on the edge of a lake that produces beautiful sunrises.  I'm hoping I can use the fog to create layers of color, depth and texture. I know the exact point that the sun will rise so I took some test composition photos today.  I'm glad I did.  I don't have as many shots as I thought I would and I'm going to need to try both a direct and bounced flash for the foreground.


----------



## limr (Oct 21, 2016)

For that kind of scene, I'd definitely go Portra. It's really good at the more subtle layering of colors. I also prefer Agfa Vista 200 as my standard go-to consumer film, although I think it's essentially rebranded Fujicolor. I was never impressed with Fuji Superia (oddly, I always felt that it ran cool while Kodak Gold ran too warm) and I became less enamored of Kodak Gold. The Agfa seems to strike a good color temp balance and keep the grain under control.

Having said that, I might revisit this a bit given that we just got a new scanner and are seeing some interesting comparisons between it and the old flatbed.

But I still can't say enough about Portra.

At sundown:



Day 211 - Boats in Strunjan cropped by limrodrigues, on Flickr

And those more subtle colors and layers I mentioned:



Day 210 - Reeds and Piran by limrodrigues, on Flickr


----------



## Penny220 (Oct 21, 2016)

Very nice!  

I just uploaded a couple of the test shots onto Instagram 
chainsaw_penny   taken around 2:30 in the direction that the sunrise will be.  
For the one with the birds of paradise is where I will use a fill flash


----------



## webestang64 (Oct 21, 2016)

Just about all the film I use these days is 400. Fujicolor 400 ISO, set at 320. Ilford Delta 400 or Kodak Tri-X, ISO setting depends on camera and lens I'm using. 
When I want a slower film I'll go with Kodak Ektar 100 or Ilford Delta 100. 

Also, if the film is developed properly (a lab that still uses control strips to monitor their c-41 unit*) there is no decenable shift in color between manufacturer. Besides filters are a great way to "shift" color to your liking.  

*The lab I currently work at does this and our development of C-41 is tops in the US. 

Good luck and have fun with film!


----------



## Penny220 (Oct 24, 2016)

My flash still worked after 4 yrs of storage so I replaced the batteries and never checked...needless to say the flash didn't work.  400 ISO was nowhere near enough.  I shot allot with my phone and waited it out.  I'll send the film out and wait before I try it again and with an 800 next time.  That was pre-dawn and the next location was just after sunrise at a pond filled with fog.  I think I have some really nice shots of that.


----------



## limr (Oct 24, 2016)

Penny220 said:


> My flash still worked after 4 yrs of storage so I replaced the batteries and never checked...needless to say the flash didn't work.  400 ISO was nowhere near enough.  I shot allot with my phone and waited it out.  I'll send the film out and wait before I try it again and with an 800 next time.  That was pre-dawn and the next location was just after sunrise at a pond filled with fog.  I think I have some really nice shots of that.



Looking forward to seeing some results!


----------



## Penny220 (Nov 1, 2016)

> Looking forward to seeing some results!


 me too.  Where are people posting pics too and where are people developing their film at.  To date all I've seen is people advertising their own labs.  The "Dark Room" seems to be on target.  Any advice?


----------



## limr (Nov 1, 2016)

Penny220 said:


> > Looking forward to seeing some results!
> 
> 
> me too.  Where are people posting pics too and where are people developing their film at.  To date all I've seen is people advertising their own labs.  The "Dark Room" seems to be on target.  Any advice?



The Darkroom is one place. There's also Dwayne's in Kansas, and Richard Photo Lab in California.

I've only recently started started sending my color film out to be developed. I had a local photo store that had been in business for 78 years, and they were doing all my color film (I do my own b&w) until they closed just a few weeks ago. It's a shame, too. They could have stayed in business - they had a good location with a ready-to-exploit market of people with more money than sense - but they were stuck in their old ways and didn't know how to adapt to the changing market. 

So I only have experience with Dwayne's and they seem to be fine in terms of development. My bf and I have our own scanner, so I can't speak to Dwayne's scan quality.


----------



## webestang64 (Nov 7, 2016)

Penny220 said:


> > Looking forward to seeing some results!
> 
> 
> me too.  Where are people posting pics too and where are people developing their film at.  To date all I've seen is people advertising their own labs.  The "Dark Room" seems to be on target.  Any advice?



We do mail order film development at Schiller's Camera in St. Louis.


----------



## minicoop1985 (Nov 8, 2016)

I use a local lab called Photo World. They're set up for mail order, but I'm unsure if they do it for customer orders or just commercial clients. I should really ask.


----------

