if i wanted to make 35mm slides for projection, do I need transparency

>>2859771
If you use standard 35mm film (Print film) all your colors and tones will be reversed. Blue will look orange, skin tones will look blue-green, and bright skies will look black, and dark things will look light.

For projection, you'd want slide film.

>>2859771
It's called slide film, because it's what you can put in slides right after development.

I'm sure there are ways to get normal reversal film onto slides as well. Obviously you can't use those as slides as they are. I've never even thought about it.

>which i guess is hard to film these days
What does this mean? Harder to find? No, some popular film types today have slide versions, and all the important slide-only film is still around.
You're gonna pay more for slides, and slides require slightly more skill than reversal (as in you actually need to expose for it,) but it's practically like shooting with a digital camera in terms of DR.

If you shoot color film in any way seriously, you should be using slides. It's the only way to get the colors you want every time.

>>2859771
You can shoot negatives and have them printed in slides. That's how filmmakers have been doing for decades.

Unfortunately, you'll need a lab that works with motion picture stock, and unless you have tons and tons of negatives they'll either refuse to do it or take all your money.

>>2859777
>and all the important slide-only film is still around.

Except Kodachrome

>>2859777
>all the important slide-only film is still around
not even close

rest of the post is solid advice, though

File: image.png (161KB, 399x388px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 399x388px

>>2860013
enough