Let’s start with color film. There are two types of color film: positive and negative.
Positive and negative film
Positive Film It records the image exactly as you saw it when you pressed the shutter. It produces rich, saturated colors and tends to have strong contrast. In my experience, it is much less forgiving. You need to get the exposure right, or there’s little you can do about it later. I tend to avoid high contrast scenes with positive film (or use graduated neutral density filters to reduce the contrast). Positive film, once professionally developed, is usually mounted as slides.
Negative film It records the opposite of what it sees. In black and white everything is inverted, black becomes white and white becomes black. So when you hold it up to light and print it, the black parts block the light and appear lighter in the print, and the light parts let more light through and appear darker in the print. The same is true with color negative film, but as negatives they tend to have a yellowish-orange chaotic look. Color negative films often have lower contrast, a wider dynamic range, and a softer look than color positive films.
Which one should you use? We encourage you to experiment and see which one you like best. Below are some film recommendations based on the type of image you want to create.
The best film for landscape photography
Overall Best
Fujifilm’s Fujichrome Velvia 50 is very expensive at $30 a roll, but I have yet to find a color positive film that looks as good as Velvia. The color saturation is legendary (leaning red/magenta) and the neutral gray balance means there are very few weird colors in the shadows or highlights. Because of the price, I don’t shoot with it very often, but when I go out into nature, I always bring it with me.
runner-up
Kodak E100 is a new film for me, but I’ve shot a few rolls with it already and can say that it’s completely different from Velvia. It doesn’t have any of the warmth of Velvia, the colors are rather neutral with a slight greenish tint in the highlights. I would recommend this film if you want to shoot landscapes with a different look to the Velvia influenced images of the last 50 years.
For those on a budget
This is also new to me. I’ve only shot two rolls of this color negative film so far, but my overwhelming impression so far has been that it’s a film stock that reproduces what you shoot with a digital camera. The grain is very fine, the colors are very close to what the Sony digital sensor records, and they’re cool and natural. I’ll admit that I didn’t like the results when I first saw them, but I’m starting to like them more and more. And the price is right.
The best film for portraits
A portrait film should handle skin tones well. My favorite, Fujifilm’s 160 Pro, has been discontinued, leaving the popular Kodak in its place. At $14 a roll, it’s probably the best value of any film. Porta 160 is a great film for portraits and in most cases, it renders skin as it is. There are also 400 and 800 speed versions if you need something faster for shooting in low light. I think this film has too much grain for color portraits, but it’s available if you’re looking for that look.
The best black and white movies
There are countless black and white movies out there, including reissues of popular films from decades ago. This is a pretty biased list, since “best” in this case is entirely subjective. Again, it’s best to just try them out and see which ones you like best.
Overall Best
Tri-X was introduced in the 1940s and has been in production ever since. It has undergone several changes over the years, the most recent being a redesign to reduce grain in 2011 (when it received the TX designation). Used by photographers as diverse as Sebastião Salgado, Vivian Mayer, and Garry Winogrand, Tri-X is beloved for its versatility, with just the right amount of grain and contrast to give your images a unique look and texture that other films lack. It has deep black shadows, great contrast, and just enough grain without being too much. Tri-X is also very easy to process yourself. If you could only shoot one roll of film, this would be it.
runner-up
Another versatile film, Ilford’s HP5 has a wide exposure latitude so it works well in a variety of or difficult lighting. It has less overall contrast than Tri-X, which gives it a smoother look. It also pushes very well without becoming overly grainy like Tri-X. If you want a good all-around film with smooth, even tones, this is a good choice.
Great for low light
First, let’s get the important stuff out of the way: Kodak calls this a “multi-speed” film. You don’t have to shoot at 3200; I like to shoot at 800 and develop at 1600. It took me a few years to realize that I was trying to make T-Max look like Tri-X, but the point is that T-Max 3200 is much more versatile than its speed would suggest. That said, I tend to use it when shooting in the evening or at night.
Film Development
There used to be a film developing lab on every street corner, or at least a little kiosk in a parking lot, but those days are long gone. However, there are plenty of professional film developing labs that offer mail-order or quick turnaround services. Most labs will also be happy to scan your negatives, but this will be at a higher cost.
There are hundreds of good labs out there, but your best bet is to go and talk to your local photo shop. You’ll get better results if you build a relationship with your local photo shop, because they’ll know what you like and don’t like, and they’ll help you negotiate and communicate with the lab if necessary. That said, many camera stores outsource their developing to large online services (my local store sends their film to Nation’s lab), so be sure to find out where they’re developing your film.
