What is the optimum film for macro-photography of flowers?

[A miller]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Please assume that the flowers will be more or less in a sunny environment.

 

I am planning to use my 50mm summicron dual range, a polarizing filter and a tripod to test the maximum potential of the lens. I do n't want to fall short b/c I didn't use the optimum film.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

Adam

Edited June 2, 2013 by A miller

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Adam,

 

Since there is no Kodachrome & there is no Cibachrome to print it on, why don't you ask "Doc Henry"?

 

Henry knows a thing or 2 about photographing flowers with film.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[A miller]

Thanks. I'm sure Mr. Henry knows the answer. Perhaps he will read my post and respond. In the meantime, I'd have thought loads of others would have experience with this and might care to share. Thanks again.

[Karl G]

Adam, it's been awhile since I shot film but I used to prefer 135 Kodak Porta 160 VC In 2010-2011 Kodak reduced grain size and merged the NC and VC into one film, first in the 400 Porta then the 160. If processed digitally you of course can control saturation in PP but for direct to print colors the VC was very pleasing to me.

[A miller]

Thanks, Karl. The port 160 would be my choice. But I don't know if the Kodak Ektar 100 is better. And I haven't used the Fuji films enough to know about them.

[erl]

I would be suggesting Portra 160. The Ektar in my past experience has higher contrast and the colours tend towards 'poster' saturation.

 

The best solution, if time permits, try a short roll of each to assess your acceptance of them. At the end of the day, it is really a matter taste and preference.

[Peter_S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Why not try a balanced slide film? I would suggest Provia 100F...just a thought.

[CalArts 99]

Why not try a balanced slide film? I would suggest Provia 100F...just a thought.

 

That would be my suggestion, too. Why not use reversal film with its fine grain and sharpness (Provia has an RMS of 8.) Plus you'll have a relatively neutral color bias and an original to base your scanned file (and/or print) from. With negative film you'll have to guess/assume which colors are correct unless you have the original flowers next to you to judge your colors (with reversal film just include a color chart in your first frame and go from there.) I personally find that E-6 film scans really nicely and I always have a positive as a reference.

[chris_livsey]

Although the Ektar has received very positive reviews I have not got on with at all, it may be me but the above suggestions of going E6 are sound on all counts.

Buy a selection and "waste" it testing then you will know what works for you.

 

By the way any filter, and that includes polarising which are especially difficult to manufacture to tight tolerances, will degrade your lens performance. Many will argue this is vanishingly small in the real world but, if you want to test the maximum potential of your lens test that, not a lens with a filter.

I think you will all MTF charts test the lens, not one with a filter on

 

By all means use it for pictorial effect but not for testing a lens.

[xalo]

Since Kodachrome and Astia 100F have disappeared, for the more natural rendering Provia 100F has my preference. Ektar I tried once, seems very saturated to me.

The example is a scan from Provia 100F pushed to iso 200, straight as from the lab, only reduced. (R7 & 90/2)

Best,

Alexander

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[TomB_tx]

Macro work with a polarizing filter will mean long exposures if you stop down for depth of field. Outdoors around here there is also movement of the flowers in the constant breezes, so a faster film is helpful for a faster shutter to reduce movement blur, so you have to balance grain / speed etc. I'd suggest including Portra 400 in your trials.

[A miller]

Many thanks, Aelxander and Tom

 

Alexander- your picture is gorgeous. I will have to try the Fuji.

 

I think what I'll do is make a few rounds around the Arboretum, one round with a different film (for sure your Fuji, and the porta 160 anmd 400, and possibly some slide film), and I will take an shot of each flower with and w/o the polarizer filter.

[gsgary]

I have never shot macro on film but this is Fuji Reala 120 film

 

 

and a crop of the shot above

 

[A miller]

Gorgeous. Thanks for sharing this.

[gsgary]

Gorgeous. Thanks for sharing this.

 

This is Agfa Precisa (Fuji slide but not sure which one) maybe worth a try

 

[A miller]

wow, this is stunning! Do you know if my nikon coolscan could get me TIFF files that would allow me to make edits and capture the quality for printing?

[erl]

wow, this is stunning! Do you know if my nikon coolscan could get me TIFF files that would allow me to make edits and capture the quality for printing?

 

I don't know which coolscan you have but I have the Nikon 5000 and 8000 models and they most certainly will give what you want. I have scanned Portra 400 and printed it to approx 2 metres x 2 metres. The image was an aerial pic shot at altitude of 2000ft. In the print it was easy to read the numbers on the jumpers of football players that were in the picture, which was a landscape to illustrate the proximity of a particular school to the city, which is about 30 metres away. The real limiting factor is your skill.

[A miller]

Hi Erl - i have the coolscan 9000. I'm probably limited by my skill but am a quick study and will practice.

[erl]

The CoolScan 9000 is an excellent machine. Same as the 8000 but faster.

 

I recommend using VueScan instead of the NikonScan. Initially, the interface seems unfriendly but is actually much better, IMO.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[gsgary]

The CoolScan 9000 is an excellent machine. Same as the 8000 but faster.

 

I recommend using VueScan instead of the NikonScan. Initially, the interface seems unfriendly but is actually much better, IMO.

 

I downloaded Vue Scan but couldn't get my head round it but i only tried a few times, my mistake it was Silverfast, going to have a look at Vue Scan

Edited June 5, 2013 by gsgary