What film to use?

[kllee]

I'll be trying my luck shooting at the Singapore Youth Fest tomorrow. It should bright sunshine and a kaleidescope of colour, so what film should I use? My gut feeling tells me Kodak Max 400 for vibrancy. Your advice? Also need advice on filter: the bright glare will be a problem, so what sort of filter should I be using?

I know they're kiddishly easy questions, but I'm a newbie still on his hands and knees!

Cheers!

 

[ckiang]

Originally posted by kllee
I'll be trying my luck shooting at the Singapore Youth Fest tomorrow. It should bright sunshine and a kaleidescope of colour, so what film should I use? My gut feeling tells me Kodak Max 400 for vibrancy. Your advice? Also need advice on filter: the bright glare will be a problem, so what sort of filter should I be using?

I know they're kiddishly easy questions, but I'm a newbie still on his hands and knees!

Cheers!

Avoid Avoid Avoid Kodak MAX 400 unless you want super big grain. Try the Fuji films instead. If it's that bright, then use Superia 200. Filters actually increase the chance of flare, don't really need anything other than the UV protective filter anyway.

Regards
CK

 

[ziploc]

Hmm... Kodak Max 400 is one negative that we all try to avoid here... I'd use Fuji superia xtra 400 instead. As for the glare, perhaps a polariser would help?

 

[kllee]

Wow! Never expected the replies to be coming in so quick! Just as I'm gonna be leaving the office soon too! Thanks guys!

As I'll be going to normal photo lab later, I suppose they'll only have the normal Superia film, so I suppose I'll have to go with that.

Another question: I've always placed my faith in Fuji and it's never failed me before, esp when it comes to scenery shots. But to me, that's natural 'cos Fujis pick up the green spectrum of light best, so I'd think that Kodak would bring out the vibrancy. Please enlighten my puny photographic brain, thanks!

 

[scanner]

Originally posted by ziploc
Hmm... Kodak Max 400 is one negative that we all try to avoid here... I'd use Fuji superia xtra 400 instead. As for the glare, perhaps a polariser would help?

Where is this Singapore Youth Fest held?
Most likely might be going down to shoot some pics.....

BTW, since it should be a sunny day, you might consider using
FuJi superia 200 or 100 (Note: Fuji Superia film series - Skin tone tend to be a bit reddish, but it is @ a acceptable level).
Hope my 2 cents of inputs is helpful.

 

[ckiang]

Originally posted by kllee
Wow! Never expected the replies to be coming in so quick! Just as I'm gonna be leaving the office soon too! Thanks guys!

As I'll be going to normal photo lab later, I suppose they'll only have the normal Superia film, so I suppose I'll have to go with that.

Another question: I've always placed my faith in Fuji and it's never failed me before, esp when it comes to scenery shots. But to me, that's natural 'cos Fujis pick up the green spectrum of light best, so I'd think that Kodak would bring out the vibrancy. Please enlighten my puny photographic brain, thanks!

Kodak films tend to be warmer - stronger in reds/yellows. But their Max 400 is a disgrace. If you want to try Kodak, use their Gold 200 instead. Otherwise, use Superia 200.

Regards
CK

 

[Larry]

Originally posted by kllee
It should bright sunshine and a kaleidescope of colour, so what film should I use?

if it's gonna be that bright, you should use ISO100 film instead, can't really go wrong with any brand for ISO100. colour saturation should be better too, esp with the Fujis...

 

[ziploc]

Agree with firefox. And with iso100 you get more details too.

 

[Ian]

Kodak 400 Max has to be the worst emulsion kodak have released in the last 30 years.

It's bad points:
Golfball grain
Even with perfect exposure it's awful, and god help you if you underexpose by any amount the grain grows from golfballs to soccer balls.

Excessive contrast
Shadow detail, what shadow detail?

Sharpness (Lack of)
Self explainatory .. it's about as sharp as a blunt knife.

The Good points.

HELP!! can anyone think of a single good thing about Max???? :devil:

Truely it's that bad, it's so bad I'd use 3M before Max.

Now to the more serious side of the post.

100 ISO for bright daylight shooting, Kodak if you want warmer oranges and yellows, Fuji if you want more vibrant greens and blues.

200 ISO - Never use it, it's neither here nor there as far as I'm concerned. 200 ISO doesn't have the rendition of 100 ISO nor the speed of 400 ISO and in the consumer level emulsions it's frankly not worth worrying about. (Different story with pro film however)

400 ISO - There is only one choice in consumer film, Fuji. Fuji Superia (Xtra) is a great emulsion, with wide exposure latitude, highly saturated colours and takes underexposure gracefull. Excellent with flash too.

 

[ckiang]

Originally posted by Ian
Kodak 400 Max has to be the worst emulsion kodak have released in the last 30 years.

It's bad points:
Golfball grain
Even with perfect exposure it's awful, and god help you if you underexpose by any amount the grain grows from golfballs to soccer balls.

Excessive contrast
Shadow detail, what shadow detail?

Sharpness (Lack of)
Self explainatory .. it's about as sharp as a blunt knife.

The Good points.

HELP!! can anyone think of a single good thing about Max???? :devil:

Truely it's that bad, it's so bad I'd use 3M before Max.

Now to the more serious side of the post.

100 ISO for bright daylight shooting, Kodak if you want warmer oranges and yellows, Fuji if you want more vibrant greens and blues.

200 ISO - Never use it, it's neither here nor there as far as I'm concerned. 200 ISO doesn't have the rendition of 100 ISO nor the speed of 400 ISO and in the consumer level emulsions it's frankly not worth worrying about. (Different story with pro film however)

400 ISO - There is only one choice in consumer film, Fuji. Fuji Superia (Xtra) is a great emulsion, with wide exposure latitude, highly saturated colours and takes underexposure gracefull. Excellent with flash too.

Have you tried the "New and Improved" Max 400? I am so skeptical about it now that I don't even want to waste my time and effort trying. ;p

Superia 400 is nice, but when I use it to shoot a wedding (couldn't get hold of NPH 400 in time as it was pretty last minute), it appears oversaturated.

Regards
CK

 

[kllee]

Wow! Thanks to everyone for the suggestions! Kodak really kenna condemned, eh? Anyway, I got a Superia 200, so I'm gonna loading and getting ready to roll soon. Only problem is, it's looking overcast. Sigh! Overcast just don't make nice cheerful pics that I wanna make today. Should've gotten black and white ones for standby too, for the melancholic angle in case it rains.

scanner: it's gonna be at the National Stadium, but don't drive and park in the immediate vincinity 'cos it's gonna be restricted parking (minister going). And I'm not sure if you require a pass to get in, depends on how lax security is. I do suspect that it'll be NPCC kids who're on duty though.

 

[kllee]

Hi all! Back from a hectic day of making sure my students are alright for the SYF, and also running up from Gate 3 of Stadium to the Grandstand to snap shots.

I'm kinda afraid see how the pics turn out 'cos there were occasions I was really nervous and my hand was shaking and I was breathing quite hard! I was 'snapping' a lot, which I suppose may cause the camera to jerk a little (?). Another lesson learnt is, to have 2 cameras on hand, one for the zoom shots, the other for the wide angles. Was fumbling back and forth changing lenses! Still I'm hoping for good results. Should've brought along more film though, didn't expect to be so trigger happy. But all in all, it was a great experience, a real buzz. Was rather annoyed by an official photographer who got into my shot when he was trying to get his! What an idiot! And he didn't even bother! He just gave me a 'who the hell are you?' look! ;(

Also saw a fair number of 'non-credited' photographers prowling the place. Anyone from this forum? Cheers!