Velvia 50 replacement

[Drew Wiley]

Specific films are just like any other tool - you need the right one for the right job. It makes a huge difference to me. For about ten years, nearly all chrome film from both Fuji and Kodak were on triacetate base. That stuff is hell to work with if you need accurate registration. It's dimensionally unstable. Only PET or Estar base is consistent. So the workaround? - fairly rapidly generate a precision duplicate with all the contrast and color masking adjustments built in. But to do that well, you again need very specific films designed for that. Now none of those exist, but neither does Cibachrome. And now there are analogous issues involving internegatives from chromes, or directly printing the right color neg to the right RA4 paper. But at least the remaining sheet films are on nice stiff polyester base (PET). So times are good.

Yeah, I know... why not just scan and digitally print, blah, blah? That would be a step backwards for me. Ain't the same thing as optical printing. Might be fine for many, but not for me.

But I did just finish off a fun roll of 35mm E100. No plans to do anything with it. Can't even get mounted slides anymore for projector use unless I mount them myself. But it's a good idea to periodically keep ones metering skills finely honed using limited range chrome film, which is easy to evaluate over a lightbox, and in this case, compare real-world spotmeter results with the Nikon TTL metering. The Spotmeter is always more accurate; but I don't like putting all my eggs in one basket.

[koraks]

Thanks for the suggestion. I wonder though if being so much removed from the film will just push me back to using digital exclusively? I want there to be some connection to the film I'm using. On the other hand, I have converted color film to BW digital photos. So maybe I'm doing that already.

I wouldn't worry too much about this, Alan. I take it that you're a hobby photograoher, like myself. And moreover it seems you're looking for your own preferential color palette and that you somehow value the connection with film in your photography. So happily shoot film, and happily adjust colors in any way you want (digital or analog) so that you get to enjoy the film-based process you like and also the resulting images you like. There will always be a connection between both, because you started out with one and ended up with the other. Would the same have been possible all digital? Of course not! The provenance would be different. The casual observer perhaps wouldn't even notice, but you do. In a way, the process is part of the final photograph, and by extension, you are part of it as well. See it as not just a technical matter, but a philosophical question of what a photograph is. Well, that would be my take on it, at least.

[Alan Klein]

I wouldn't worry too much about this, Alan. I take it that you're a hobby photograoher, like myself. And moreover it seems you're looking for your own preferential color palette and that you somehow value the connection with film in your photography. So happily shoot film, and happily adjust colors in any way you want (digital or analog) so that you get to enjoy the film-based process you like and also the resulting images you like. There will always be a connection between both, because you started out with one and ended up with the other. Would the same have been possible all digital? Of course not! The provenance would be different. The casual observer perhaps wouldn't even notice, but you do. In a way, the process is part of the final photograph, and by extension, you are part of it as well. See it as not just a technical matter, but a philosophical question of what a photograph is. Well, that would be my take on it, at least.

I appreciate your positive views. Those are mine pretty much as well. I like film for the contemplative process. But I don't have a darkroom. So using digital is required to get results I can see and present. I'm ok with that.