Film Type (and Processing)

[TiggerificTigger]

My DH and I are leaving next week for AKL, and I can't believe how close it is getting. I love taking pictures while at DW. We usually end up with about ten rolls of film. The last two years I have used Kodak's High Definition film. I am not sure if I can personally tell the difference with the high definition.

I was justing wondering - what type of film does everyone else use?

Thanks!

 

[vettechick99]

I bought some of Wolf Camera's house brand (I think it's called Ritz) last year and couldn't believe the quality. We used it and some Kodak to take engagement pictures and when we got the rolls back, the color of the Ritz film was so bright and gorgeous. So for my trip in a few weeks, I'll be going and picking up some 400 ISO of that!

And the best part, each roll is only like $2.

 

[Squirlz]

I've always been happy with Fuji film. Besides the picture quality it can be found on sale frequently and coupons can be had as well!

 

[WillCAD]

My personal preference has always been Fuji as well.

Fuji is balanced more for outdoor photography, The colors are more vivid and jump right off the print at you, whereas every roll of Kodak I have ever shot has come out muted and washy, because Kodak is balanced more nuetral to even out skin tones.

If I were taking more pics of people than of things or places, I might use Kodak. But since I take more pics of WDW than everything else combined, I stick with the Fuji. It really brings out those beautiful blue Florida skies! Kodak makes 'em gray...

 

[tjevans]

It's been so long since I used film I don't remember for sure, but I believe reading in Consumer Reports that "High Definition" Kodak film was the same as the rest of their film as far as picture clarity. Purely a marketing gimmick, iirc.

 

[AbbysFamily]

When I shoot, I prefer Kodak by far over fuji. However, that said - I would have to say its because of my pickiness with skin tones.

I've tried the HiDef, but can't say its drastically better. It also depends on what you are shooting - Indoors, outdoors, etc.

If you are shooting Mixed, I like Kodak 400... If you are exclusive outdoors - Go to the 100 for the grain, but know indoor shots will suck. I found the new 400s grain are as good as the 200, so the 200 isn't worth the mix.

All IMHO, of course.

 

[TiggerificTigger]

Thanks for the replies! I am afraid I have another (sort of long) dilemma. Two years ago, I used my dad's camera with Kodak HD processed at Wal-Mart one-hour. The pictures were off-center and Wal-Mart missed a few prints. Last year, I bought a new Canon with Kodak HD processed at Target one-hour. Negatives came back "something sticky" on them, and some of the prints reflected it. Honeymoon pictures - by the way. I had the negs cleaned my wedding photographer's lab. I then went to have them reprinted at a specialized camera. Turned out they were not all that clean and faded. So, my only photo of me and DH with Cinderella is very spotted.

I decided to take a test roll with both camera taking the same pictures. I took them to Target. Last year, they were outsourced and now they are in-house. One woman had tried to be helpful recently with reprints, so I tried them again. Just got the prints back and they appear "pixelized" in my opinion.

I am very frustrated with the whole film process. (For the digital camera users, I know I probably should have bought a digital camera. But, I ran out of time to research which one to buy.) Does anyone have any suggestions, ideas, etc.? They majority of the pics I take are of DW, but I would say at least one in four are of DH or me.

 

[vettechick99]

You know Tigger, I was just going to say that I only get my film developed at Wolf. It does cost more, but the quality is a billion times better. They'll even put a white border around the print. Can you start going there?

 

[TiggerificTigger]

vettechick99 -- There is a Wolf Camera by work that I could go to. I just thought I read on the boards somewhere that they used the same machine as Wal-Mart (might have been Fox though). Although, may be their personnel would be more experienced with photos. Thanks for the suggestion!

 

[vettechick99]

vettechick99 -- There is a Wolf Camera by work that I could go to. I just thought I read on the boards somewhere that they used the same machine as Wal-Mart (might have been Fox though). Although, may be their personnel would be more experienced with photos. Thanks for the suggestion!

I'm not sure if the equipment is the same or what, I just know my results are far better. I don't have a Wolf near me anymore so I had to drop my pics off at Wal-mart and they were awful. Same film, same skill but quality sucked.

I don't know what it is, it's just better to me.

 

[seashoreCM]

You will notice graininess in 800 speed film pictures printed as 4x6 inches. You may notice graininess in 400 speed film pictures.

I would not be surprised if some film processors do the prints digitally and also you can see pixellation. I haven't had any prints done that way.

I have had good? results with CVS and Walgreens processing, but maybe I don't notice the deficiencies.

How were your pictures awful? That is, how did the quality suck? (describe)

Disney hints:
http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/disney.htm

 

[AbbysFamily]

If you get your pictures printed "in-store" - ie 1 hour, etc ANYWHERE!! you are lucky to get your prints at all, much less good prints.

Before we switched to digital, my wife learned her lesson when she lost a roll. But when she ignored me and got Target, walgreens, etc prints.... They were always 2nd rate.

If your going to stick with 35mm, then find a local place that is a real photo lab or take them somewhere where they get sent to a real lab. Those little 'foolproof' machines that they put into places for 1 hour are often run with little to no training and are often sub-par.

If your going digital, pick a budget, then ask again. You'd be SHOCKED what you can get digital. We just bought a new one for our next trip. Canon S2 IS... GREAT camera.. I can't wait to shoot at disney with this one!! For $500 its hard to beat!

Good luck - feel free to PM if you want more info (I've had several 35mm and digital and shoot a ton of film and love shooting digital now).

 

[TiggerificTigger]

I did take some digital photos to Walgreen's over the weekend, and they looked better than the prints from Target. My digital camera is four or five years old without much zoom, so I wouldn't take it on the trip with me. So, I will be sticking with my 35mm for at least this trip.

Target's prints did not even feel like normal photos. The prints looked as if they were printed on a photo printer at home causing the dots of color. It was Target's next day service, but I think they still do that service in house.

For those that use Fugi, have you ever tried their True Definition film? I saw it at the store the other day, and it mentioned more natural skin tones.

I realize my expectations may be a little too high. I just love taking and having the photos. I may try the local camera store or even Walgreen's two day service. But, I know I am going to avoid one-hour or in-house at the retail stores.

Everyone - thanks for your help. Maybe this year it will be better.

 

[AbbysFamily]

I realize my expectations may be a little too high. I just love taking and having the photos. I may try the local camera store or even Walgreen's two day service. But, I know I am going to avoid one-hour or in-house at the retail stores.

Definately try the local camera store (wherever you are)... Many I've come across are reasonably prices and will go the extra mile. Most now will also sell you at reasonable cost pretty good images on CD at the same time - So you can post and share your pics

Have a good trip!