On Sat, 2 May 1998, George Shirley wrote: > The best color photos of my life were made with Sakura film. I've never > seen it in the States but used to buy it in Saudi Arabia. Often wish I had > frozen a case of it to bring home. The pinks were pink, the blues were > blue, almost total realistic color in just your ordinary hopped Canon AE-1 > with everything manual. I shot some lotus blossoms in Thailand that look > absolutely the same color in the photo as in life. Sakura was absorbed by somebody who was absorbed by Konica, so you might want to try Konica film sometime. The only Konica I've used was the SR-G3200 Pro, a wonderful film for pushing, but lousy (imho) color balance, though I might have been having problems with reciprocity failure. Konica films are pretty well known for standing up to mixed color temp. light sources and still looking good. I just don't use them because I have a hard time finding Konica pro. I went to Fuji just before a big trip to Britain (overcast skies, primarily interested in flowers instead of skin tones) when Kodak doubled the cost on Ektachrome pro. We had a side-by-side slide showing later of Kodak Ektachrome, Kodachrome pro, and Fujichrome pro -- same subjects, same time, different cameras -- and we unanimously thought the Fujichrome slides had more punch. YMMV. Remember, when you're doing *prints* instead of slides, they can change the filtration packs and give you better results sometimes. Or there's always Adobe photoshop. ;-) BTW, one of the major differences between the "pro" and "amateur" films is that the pro films are sent out when the color balance is closest to natural. They need to be kept refrigerated before and after use, and processed by a good lab. Amateur films are designed to sit on the shelf at room temp, but show a distinct difference in color rendition between films close to their expiration date and "fresh~ film. Kay Lancaster kay@fern.com just back from a 70 mi train ride on a freight line in antique passenger railcars. :-)