Neg vs Chrome 4x5

[John Rodriguez]

Kevs, you should really try both. A couple boxes of film will tell you more then we can, and it won't cost you much.

If you can get the range you need on a chrome, they're fantastic. For times when that's not possible, negatives are there for you.

Fluid mounting - you use fluid when mounting the film to a glass holder with the goal of increasing contrast and reducing the impact of scratches. SPI is short for samples per inch. Try googling SPI and PPI (pixels per inch) in relation to scanning as well as fluid mounting. They're fairly long topics.

[Robert Jonathan]

Don't be afraid of chromes. They have more latitude/dynamic range than people on this forum would like you to believe. Provia and E100G is good stuff.

[Bruce Watson]

Any opinions on this subject?

ROFLMAO! Opinions? Here? Maybe. Just a few.

My own opinion is that the WYSIWYG aspect of a tranny on the light table is the one of the few advantages that a tranny has over a negative. Back in the old days of magazine and advertising work, where the images had to be evaluated by a team including an art director, this WYSIWYG aspect of trannies trumped all else.

Today not so much, because these days that work is nearly 100% digital. It's rare to find LF film being used by anyone outside our little community of artists and hobbyists. So there's not a committee hovering around a light table evaluating shots, there's just me. And I've learned to look at and evaluate a negative on the light table without the crutch of a proof print.

It's actually easier than it sounds. It's like looking at the ground glass -- I only see everything upside down and backwards now if I will it. Otherwise I see everything right side up -- the human brain adjusts. IOW, I've learned how to subtract the orange mask and invert the colors in my head while looking at a tranny on a light table. I'm not alone in this; a fair number of people here can do just that. All it takes is some effort, practice, and a refusal to use the crutch (contact print or scanned image). I only scan the films that make it past this evaluation.

That's my opinion on this subject. I haven't exposed a tranny in more than a decade, so I'm putting my money where my mouth is. But just because this works for me doesn't mean it will work for you. As they saying goes: There are many paths to the waterfall.

[Drew Wiley]

I was simply recommending chromes because you can see exactly what you got on film. You can just shoot 4x5 and put it on a lightbox, or more economically learn about
the characteristics of a particular film by shooting it in a smaller camera, provided you
meter it in the same manner. In other words, you can isolate this variable and perfect
it before you move on to the next. It's difficult to "read" a color neg on a lightbox without quite a bit of experience actually printing them. Another advantage of a chrome is that it does require more discipline with correct exposure, and is good training even if you shoot negs later. Of course you can scan and preview your work
on a screen, but then you've got a whole other set of variables which might be misleading if your intended end result is in fact a print. You'd need to synchronize your
whole workflow to your own printer. That's fine, but then you've got to learn several
things and hope all this different equipment is working properly. View camera technique
itself takes awhile to learn. But whatever ... just take your time and have fun!

[Mike Anderson]

thanks guys,
Ok, cool. btw is there another good source then for used scanners other than ebay. or is that the only game in town.

Epson clearance center:

http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/B...jsp?oid=-13268

[kevs-2323668]

Daniel, great hearing from you! Do you see neg film as giving a different look? Some here don't see it. Honestly, I have a hard time seeing it to.

Ok: neg is more safe. But being I can proof with both the Canon 5D, and Fuji preview... maybe it's not worth the hassle of proofing, and like you said, chrome is gorgeous to own. But it's just more risky.. right?

[Darren H]

Darren, so you are shooting all your 4x5 with chrome? I was initially going chrome, but so many seem to advise neg.

Yep, all my film work is with chrome. For color that means the Fuji family of Velvia's and Astia.

For B+W that means shooting Efke 25 B+W negative film but having it processed at DR-5 into a positive-just that it is a B+W positive.

Part of that might also be I have no interest or ability to process my own film, I send it all to the lab. Others like the processing. But I just do not have the room or interest in being a processing game.

I have just always done chomes from when I shot 35mm film in college in the 80's and 90's through medium format 10 years ago to 4x5.

Although, I finally got into the digital game a few years ago and got a DSLR. Now my film usage is significantly less than it was overall. But when I shoot film I shoot chromes.

As others have said try both and see what works best for you. I find that often what other say I should like and what I actually like do differ.

I am silly enough to carry an Arca-Swiss into the field as I did not like working with the Linhof Technica models a friend used. The Linhof is smaller and lighter and easier to carry. However the Arca-Swiss is so much easier for me to work when actually set up. I would rather have the bulk in the pack for the much easier to use on the tripod camera.

In much the same way, I just like chromes better too. But you might find just the opposite.

[Frank Petronio]

Might as well get used to negatives since C41 processing will very probably outlive E6 processing.

And you fellas don't strike me as the sort to mix the raw materials to make color chemistry (it'd be silly without enough volume).

[Lynn Jones]

I've used a 4870 for several years and sure don't plan to replace it. I've used just about every scanner around since 1991 and prefer the flat bed Epsons (which BTW are made by Seiko).

Lynn

[kevs-2323668]

thanks Frank, yeah no chemicals here.

Ok, definitely going for chrome.

Was leaning towards Kodak 100EG. $35 / 100

I see Provia & Astia at $40 for double the amount of sheets.

From my 35mm film days, I remember Provia as being just fine (I think Astia was more considered an amateur film)

All opinions on this highly welcome!