Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 71

Thread: Reversal vs negative

  1. #61
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    15,409

    Re: Reversal vs negative

    Take it easy, Corran. I took you off "ignore" for a reason. You often have valuable insights of your own, so I don't want to circumvent them. But there are still various ways to print chromes which involve no digital intermediary steps whatsoever. The original shot can be interpreted or re-interpreted in many ways. But these all-darkroom routes inherently involve a lot of step-to-step hue and gray scale accuracy calibrations in-between. In terms of maintaining the look of the actual original in reproduced fashion, I've found out how to make very precise internegatives from current color neg sheet films plus precise masking steps. I only do a limited number of these per year because it is involved and costly; but I have the correct equipment and background, and the end result is visibly better detailed and more hue precise than inkjet printing.

    I'm also one of those fiddling intermittently with dye transfer printing, which is still feasible; but it seems like every time the needed block of time arrives to get into depth with it, some new lingering family emergency arrives. That's just what happens as one's parents and other extended family members themselves get older and need a lot of attention. Then there are also a number of other alternative color printing pathways if one wants to get involved with the UV side or printing color. Otherwise, for new color work, I've switched completely over to color neg film itself, and making RA4 prints from these is quite simple, with supplemental masking being an optional tool. But bagging a fully cooperative color neg in the first place does require paying attention to color temperature, especially if Ektar is involved, at least if one expects the clean kind of look previously offered only by chrome film.

  2. #62
    Corran's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North GA Mountains
    Posts
    8,181

    Re: Reversal vs negative

    I was referencing Cibachrome. That's part of the reason I am shooting C41 instead as I've started dabbling with RA4 but haven't done all that much, and mostly just experimental printing without any film to start with. I don't consider myself a color printer anyway, at least not primarily.

    However a good E6 shot in conditions that make it shine is still a lot of fun, even if I'm not typically printing them. I do have an old-school projector like I grew up using in schools, and have projected 8x10 and 4x5 chromes with it just for fun.
    Bryan | Blog | YouTube | Instagram | Portfolio
    All comments and thoughtful critique welcome

  3. #63

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,417

    Re: Reversal vs negative

    Yet, absolutely relevant and connected.

    ~Why _?_


    Bernice


    Quote Originally Posted by Corran View Post
    "your last statements have nothing to do with anything I've said."

  4. #64
    Alan Klein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    New Jersey was NYC
    Posts
    1,201

    Re: Reversal vs negative

    There's no reason Velvia 50 can't have pastels and less impressionable saturation since you're controlling the final after the scan. While this film "pops", you can tone down the results or amplify it, both to taste. My practice is don't overdo it. When you think you reached the right level, probably too high, turn it down just a notch. Actually the film was just as pastelly as the picture shows. Velvia just does nicely with colors for my taste.
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/alankl...7626597775701/
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 11854936794_d320c2a605_o (1).jpg  

  5. #65

    Join Date
    May 2019
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    179

    Re: Reversal vs negative

    Quote Originally Posted by Corran View Post
    Color temperature doesn't matter unless you are doing work that requires it to.

    The natural world doesn't need accurate color temperature - the film gives you exactly what color was there based on the light reflected and its proportion, with some characteristics of the film included. Whether a "white" looks "white" (reflecting all colors in equal proportion) doesn't matter whatsoever when you are trying to capture the color of the light actually reflected from your subject. Seems obvious but I have seen people ask about using a blue filter during sunset to get the "white balance" right. Missing the point there...
    As color intrepetation is always a something that triggers a lot of emotions. The same goes with removing object(s) from a scene.
    But for me the choice of staying with film is based on the characteristics of the film.
    According of the season, subject or how I see it. I choose reverse film, color negative or B&W and there you have also different options :-)
    And I don't touch the colors a lot afterwards, and yes there will be 'false colors' but this is the main reason of film otherwise you can buy a large format digital camera and play around with the RAW file until you have 'real' colors. But still this will be your interpretation of the scene.

  6. #66
    Alan Klein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    New Jersey was NYC
    Posts
    1,201

    Re: Reversal vs negative

    Quote Originally Posted by PatrickMarq View Post
    As color intrepetation is always a something that triggers a lot of emotions. The same goes with removing object(s) from a scene.
    But for me the choice of staying with film is based on the characteristics of the film.
    According of the season, subject or how I see it. I choose reverse film, color negative or B&W and there you have also different options :-)
    And I don't touch the colors a lot afterwards, and yes there will be 'false colors' but this is the main reason of film otherwise you can buy a large format digital camera and play around with the RAW file until you have 'real' colors. But still this will be your interpretation of the scene.
    I agree. Trying to saturate a portrait film like Portra made to complement flesh tones properly, will just distort the colors. Likewise, using Velvia or even Ektar when shooting people is hard to change the saturation to reflect proper flesh tones. You have a certain amount of flexibility, but that's it.

    You can't get blood from a turnip.

  7. #67
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    15,409

    Re: Reversal vs negative

    Right tools for the right job. But I actually used chrome film and Cibachrome for even portrait work, and was paid a premium for that option specifically, even though it was easier just to shoot Vericolor or whatever and C-print it. So in that case, mastering your chosen tools is really itself partially synonymous with the "right tool", which potentially differs person to person. But I never have liked turnips.

  8. #68

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,417

    Re: Reversal vs negative

    Color transparency film to print for portraits IS more difficult due to the difficulty to achieve proper color balance combined with the higher contrast nature of this combo.

    Historically, Kodak VPS was the Go-To color negative to C-print film, had good "skin tone" color rendition with moderate contrast. Kodak VPS was forgiving and user Ooops tolerant enough to good results more often than not.

    Then came Fuji NPS and NPH, which in various ways bettered Kodak VPS causing Kodak to formulate a replacement for VPS.

    Lost track of how many rolls of 120 film burned in-out of three Hasselblad cameras back then. Had to get the A12 backs serviced more than a few times due to wear.


    Bernice

  9. #69
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    15,409

    Re: Reversal vs negative

    For several decades, expensive high-end portraits were printed via dye transfer, which customarily started with chromes, not negs. There was a negative option, but the transparency route offered more control. And at that time, dye transfer prints were considered more permanent than chromogenic C-prints. A number of portrait studios specialized in that; and of course, during the same era, the color quality of the movie industry reached its apogee with the related Technicolor process.

    I've seen some remarkable 5X7 format Kodachrome shots of Hollywood celebrities of the era used for sake of dye transfer printing, as well as sets of in-camera separations on B&W film via a Curtis 5X7
    RGB tricolor camera. They came from Hurrell's studio, although he in more commonly known for his black and white portraits of celebrities.
    Last edited by Drew Wiley; 10-Jun-2021 at 13:04.

  10. #70

    Re: Reversal vs negative

    For me in Canada, the pros for E-6 film is that it is half the price of color negatives. (velvia 100 is what I use)

    I'm no expert by any means, but I can safely say that color positive film usually has less dynamic range than color negative.

    This means you have to be more careful about your exposure, and if you miss your metering, there is less room to correct in post processing.

Similar Threads

  1. Paper Negative Reversal Process (In camera positives)
    By WayneStevenson in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 12-Feb-2020, 15:37
  2. Reversal Processing with D-11
    By tgtaylor in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 5-Apr-2016, 07:11
  3. d76 reversal development
    By f90 in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 17-Apr-2012, 08:54
  4. BW reversal process
    By bluenote in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 27-Jul-2010, 01:52

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •