3 ms·

> So sad that we traded fast lenses and film for color. I am not sure the quality ever quite caught up again to the better B&W until we get to modern digital.

by radlad 1y ago

> So sad that we traded fast lenses and film for color. I am not sure the quality ever quite caught up again to the better B&W until we get to modern digital. Can you explain why color film would be a tradeoff against fast lenses? Can't you use the exact same lens with color or B&W? Or what you mean by "traded film for color"? After all, color film existed decades before digital.

JKCalhoun 1y ago
Maybe someone else knows why black and white film looks sharper and has more detail then. Was there a race to the bottom in terms of optics when color film showed up in the consumer camera? Is it because they moved to a smaller film stock than the medium format 120 film that was common in B&W cameras before color? Or is color film, with three layers of gelatin, an inherently "noisier" film stock? I don't know. I only observe the quality fall off when color arrives. Worse, I am not even sure. that my mom's 35mm camera (Canon AE-1) in the 70's shot as good and crisp photos as the B&W cameras in the family in the 40's (before she was born though).
- _aavaa_ 1y ago
  There’s multiple things going on. The larger the film stock, the easier it is to get a certain final resolution. Both because the film itself needs to be magnified less when creating the final print and because the lenses don’t need to create as small of an image. And BW film even today is still MUCH sharper, even if just perceptually, than color film.
  - brudgers 1y ago
    No one has ever looked at a photograph and wept because it was so sharp... ...of course many photographers have wept because a photograph wasn't sharp.
    - kjkjadksj 1y ago
      There have been millions of photos that have suffered at the hands of the sharpness slider.
      - radlad 1y ago
        In fairness, that's not the photo that was too sharp, but an unsharp mask that was applied too heavily. ;)
      - brudgers 1y ago
        Using sharpness never improves a photograph, only changes it.
  - radlad 1y ago
    > And BW film even today is still MUCH sharper, even if just perceptually, than color film. Maybe perceptually - due to stronger contrast and perhaps also the fact that B&W film often comes in higher speeds and probably incurs less motion blur of the subject overall. But I don't think it's actually objectively sharper per se?
    - kjkjadksj 1y ago
      In terms of grain I think the finest is still bw film. Highest exposure latitude as well. Great dynamic range as well probably still better than digital.
- smogcutter 1y ago
  Your square color photos are almost certainly made from medium format film! The most common frame size used in 120 is a 6x6cm square, especially in consumer cameras of the time. 6x6 cameras stayed popular for snapshots because they could be contact printed straight from the negative, without an enlarger. A whole roll of 120 can be contact printed onto a single sheet of paper and then cut. Much cheaper and faster than enlarging 35mm negatives. With film there’s no such thing as a b&w specific camera. The difference you’re seeing is probably down to the glass in whatever cheap & cheerful 6x6 rangefinder they took those 1950s family snaps on, vs the photos from the AE-1 which is an all time great camera & lens system.
- devb 1y ago
  Black and white film retains the developed silver particles, whereas color processing discards the silver entirely and leaves clouds of dye behind to form the image. The silver has higher acutance, of course.
- kjkjadksj 1y ago
  The ae1 was fine unless there was some junk lens from a department store on the end of it. Canon lens would have been fine. It is true color film however is usually of lower apparent quality than black and white films. A lot of people would buy consumer films that are worse than pro films (true for today as well, compare portra 160 to gold and theres noticable difference in grain size and overall fidelity). Printing was also bad. You could probably make higher quality scans or prints today if you had access to the negatives. Slide film is great though if the scene was appropriately lit. Better colors than digital even today. All the catalog photography from the late 90s was medium format slide film and you could blow it up billboard size it had so much fidelity.
brudgers 1y ago
[I am not agreeing with the grandparent comment] Color film typically benefits from optical coatings on the lenses and coated lenses are common from about 1950 onward and uncommon before WWII.

by radlad 1y ago

JKCalhoun 1y ago

Maybe someone else knows why black and white film looks sharper and has more detail then. Was there a race to the bottom in terms of optics when color film showed up in the consumer camera? Is it because they moved to a smaller film stock than the medium format 120 film that was common in B&W cameras before color? Or is color film, with three layers of gelatin, an inherently "noisier" film stock? I don't know. I only observe the quality fall off when color arrives. Worse, I am not even sure. that my mom's 35mm camera (Canon AE-1) in the 70's shot as good and crisp photos as the B&W cameras in the family in the 40's (before she was born though).

_aavaa_ 1y ago
There’s multiple things going on. The larger the film stock, the easier it is to get a certain final resolution. Both because the film itself needs to be magnified less when creating the final print and because the lenses don’t need to create as small of an image. And BW film even today is still MUCH sharper, even if just perceptually, than color film.
- brudgers 1y ago
  No one has ever looked at a photograph and wept because it was so sharp... ...of course many photographers have wept because a photograph wasn't sharp.
  - kjkjadksj 1y ago
    There have been millions of photos that have suffered at the hands of the sharpness slider.
    - radlad 1y ago
      In fairness, that's not the photo that was too sharp, but an unsharp mask that was applied too heavily. ;)
    - brudgers 1y ago
      Using sharpness never improves a photograph, only changes it.
- radlad 1y ago
  > And BW film even today is still MUCH sharper, even if just perceptually, than color film. Maybe perceptually - due to stronger contrast and perhaps also the fact that B&W film often comes in higher speeds and probably incurs less motion blur of the subject overall. But I don't think it's actually objectively sharper per se?
  - kjkjadksj 1y ago
    In terms of grain I think the finest is still bw film. Highest exposure latitude as well. Great dynamic range as well probably still better than digital.
smogcutter 1y ago
Your square color photos are almost certainly made from medium format film! The most common frame size used in 120 is a 6x6cm square, especially in consumer cameras of the time. 6x6 cameras stayed popular for snapshots because they could be contact printed straight from the negative, without an enlarger. A whole roll of 120 can be contact printed onto a single sheet of paper and then cut. Much cheaper and faster than enlarging 35mm negatives. With film there’s no such thing as a b&w specific camera. The difference you’re seeing is probably down to the glass in whatever cheap & cheerful 6x6 rangefinder they took those 1950s family snaps on, vs the photos from the AE-1 which is an all time great camera & lens system.
devb 1y ago
Black and white film retains the developed silver particles, whereas color processing discards the silver entirely and leaves clouds of dye behind to form the image. The silver has higher acutance, of course.
kjkjadksj 1y ago
The ae1 was fine unless there was some junk lens from a department store on the end of it. Canon lens would have been fine. It is true color film however is usually of lower apparent quality than black and white films. A lot of people would buy consumer films that are worse than pro films (true for today as well, compare portra 160 to gold and theres noticable difference in grain size and overall fidelity). Printing was also bad. You could probably make higher quality scans or prints today if you had access to the negatives. Slide film is great though if the scene was appropriately lit. Better colors than digital even today. All the catalog photography from the late 90s was medium format slide film and you could blow it up billboard size it had so much fidelity.

brudgers 1y ago

[I am not agreeing with the grandparent comment] Color film typically benefits from optical coatings on the lenses and coated lenses are common from about 1950 onward and uncommon before WWII.