Fujifilm Sensia anyone?

Rob MacKillop

Edinburgh Correspondent
One of my guitar students used to be a photographer, and now does something else with his life, saving his iPhone for his only photography. He saw that I was a film nut, and decided to gift me 27 rolls of out of date Sensia, mainly 100, some 200, all 35mm.

I see it is slide film. Now I made a big mistake with a roll of Velvia I had before, getting it wrongly processed. So, where can I get this processed?

And, has anyone here used it? What are its characteristics?

27 free rolls! Get in! as the masked man would say :cool:
 
Sensia is Fuji's general purpose chrome. (Fujicolor or Kodacolor indicate color negative film, while Fujichrome, Ektachrome and Kodachrome indicate transparency film. Slides are only shot with 35mm equipment, so the term "Chromes" covers all formats of transparency film—photography jargon.)

Use Sensia for anything where a daylight colour balance is appropriate. Anyone who processes slide film will be able to process it, since all slide films now are E6 process. It is a consumer film, so being out of date is not nearly as serious as it would be if it was a professional film. However, there are limits for all films. Shoot a roll and have it processed. Choose a roll with the most recent expiry date, and check the results. That will make how good it gets. If the results are unacceptable, no point in shooting older film.

If the film was refrigerated, it may still be quite usable. If not, depending upon age and storage conditions, expect loss of sensitivity, loss of contrast and worst—crossover. Crossover happens when the colour layers age differently. You may end up with blue highlights and yellow shadows—very difficult to correct even in Photoshop using individual channel corrections.

Sensia was relatively forgiving as a slide-film compared to say Kodachrome, but it still has little latitude, so bracket. When people still shot chromes for a living, through testing they established their own exposure index for each batch of film, to match their style of shooting. Nonetheless, they bracketed on anything important. When shooting stock, I ALWAYS bracketed. Correct exposure for print was about 0.66EV more dense than for projection, so I made sure I had one of each. If a magazine called, I had the denser version, and if an A/V producer wanted it, I had the projection version.

In comparison, negatives are highly forgiving. Most of them have great latitude, print and scan very well. Even when using a daylight emulsion under incandescent light, decent corrections can be made in the fume-room or digital darkroom. Using Vericolor Slide Film and sheets, I could print transparencies off negatives, with all the control that printing on paper allowed. Great results with mixed lighting before Photoshop. There was a point when I found it wise to abandon B&W film entirely, and colour negatives printed on Panalure B&W paper were extremely good. Quite a number of times, a client would look at the beauty of the B&W Panalure, and regret not assigning colour. I would simply say, "I can give you colour." and all manner of client/photographer bonding would take place.

It came down to choosing chromes when daylight was the light-source, or 3200K bulbs with tungsten balance film, where delivery time was an issue or where the budget was insufficient to put in the time doing the conversion and corrections.
 
Don't mention Trumps in Edinburgh! It's a one-man operation. His website says they have a Durst Epsilon printer - very high quality - so I prepared some images and took them in to his shop today on a CD. He said "We sold that two years ago". I protested: "But it says on your website..." - "Oh, yeah, I keep forgetting to change that"!

I was annoyed at having come so far to go home with nothing, so I asked him to print them on his cheaper machine, but it was a waste of money. They look dull and lifeless. So, I won't be going back to him. Might try amimage.

Is it good film?

- - - Updated - - -

Thanks, Larry. A full and interesting response, as usual. Appreciated.

I see that I made a mistake in the thread title by saying Fujifilm instead of the correct Fujichrome...
 
I see that I made a mistake in the thread title by saying Fujifilm instead of the correct Fujichrome...

No mistake at all. Fujifilm is the proper name of the company that makes it, just as Kodak made Kodachrome. Fujichrome is the brand name of their chrome films. Even though my X100 and X-Pro1 cameras are fully digital, they are in fact made by Fujifilm—and both have a setting that simulates Sensia when shooting JPEGs.
 
Back
Top