slide film vs. print film

[geanky 0]

What do you guys recommend and why? What is the difference between them if they are the same speed (e.g. 400 slide vs. 400 print)? And which brand has given you better results Kodak or Fuji? And how hard are they to get developed?

[ltdiver 3]

geanky,
Just a simple answer to your question.
Print film is more useful 'cause you can show it more easily to your friends at the dz without bringing along a slide viewer (or squinting in the sun).
Slides are more acceptable for publication (if that is where you want to focus). Better resolution and contrast.
Don't use something as high as 400. Most conditions we skydive in are much better with 100. Better resolution...less grainy with enlargements.
Fuji, Kodak....both are equal in quality if these are the two you are looking to use.
Ease of development? Gosh...does Puerto Rico have less access then the states for this? Wouldn't think so. Just drop off the film and wait for it to come back. Recommend, however, that unless the shots you take are just snaps that you don't really care about, that you stay away from the one hour service centers. They've botched up a couple of my rolls and I now go exclusively for professional developing only.
Hope this helps.
Any other questions?
ltdiver
____________________________________________
LightDiverCam

[prost 0]

I would like to ad that slide film is a little more sensitive to camera settings. It is easier to correct exposure during processing with print film. Slide fim can be a little sharper at lower speeds but is totally unacceptable at anything over 400. Overall cost of slide film (film plus processing) is a little cheaper. Print film is easier to scan on a home scanner. You can find some good articles at www.photo.net/learn.
William

[quade 3]

In addition to what others have said, there are a couple of other small considerations regarding print v. slide film.
Kinda geeky so stick with me.
First, read this.
Almost every method of recording an image will do so in a slightly inaccurate manner. Some manufacturers of equipment use this to their advantage and some just have to live with the realities of what their dealing with. As a photographer, you have the choice of deciding which is best for your particular project.
One of the most common print films in the U.S.A. is Kodak Gold. It has a slightly "warm" tone to it and really makes for very nice photos of what most people take picutes of -- that is to say, faces.
Kodak also makes a very good slide film that also has a slightly warm tone to it called Kodachrome. Without a doubt, more fashion & beauty magazine covers have been shot with Kodachrome film than all other films combined. Kodachrome has one HUGE disadvantage in that it can ONLY be processed by Kodak itself, so you'll have to wait a little longer than what you're used to waiting at the one-hour photo shops! BTW, I don't recommend one-hour photo shops for anything but the most casual of snap shots and certainly not for anything of any real importance.
Back to our topic of colors -- when shooting something like a sky, these warm films sort of fight the deep blues.
Slide film that is E-6 processed, such as KODAK ELITE Chrome Slide Films will have a slightly blueish tone to them and work, in my opinion, slightly better for skys. My current favorite film is Fuji Provia, but you're going to have quite a bit of trouble finding it at your local drugstore. You might want to try Calumet Photo. However, E-6 process films can make the brown dirt below a formation look somewhat magenta. So, you may have to do some color correction afterall. ;^)
All of the above said, any of these films can be scanned in and color corrected to produce outstanding magazine quality photos in the 100 ASA range it's just that if you pick the correct film to begin with, you'll have less work ahead of you.
quade
http://futurecam.com

[DZDale 0]

O.K. Heres my opinion, Ill try and give you the best advise to my knowlege, Im not a skydive photographer yet since my experience level is not quite there, but I do take up photography as a hobby. First of all I dont have a preferance to either Kodak or FujiFilm, I have used both and found Fuji Velvia to be excellent and Kodak Ektachrome Extra color is also brilliant, Very bright and punchy colours.
I would generally say that print film would be better for skydiving as its more practical around the DZ, but if you want to use it for publishing, slide film will be the better option as the quality and contrast is far better. The film lattitude on slide film is much smaller which means that it is easier to make mistakes with your exposure settings, these mistakes can usually be corrected when using print film as the exposures can be tweaked during the printing process. As far as Film speed is concerned always remember that slower film ISO 100 will give you more colour definition and finer grain, however light conditions need to be pretty good. Faster film speeds will probably be better since you will be experiencing alot of movement and therefore will need to use higher shutter speeds to freeze the action, thus allowing less light into the camera.
I found that if using print Film Fuji Superia 400 is pretty good as the grain is finer than most other 400 films and the colour definition is excellent since Fuji uses a fourth layer colour technology in their film

I hope this will help answer your question
Blue Skies
Dale