to all you film shooters :)

Discussion in 'Beyond the Basics' started by santino, Oct 5, 2004.

  1. santino

    santino TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,240
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Austria, heart in Poland -->
    ...Yesterday I bought a medium format roll of Kodak Portra 160NC and Portra 400NC. Now I would like to know, if anybody has any experience with such a film. Advice appreciated :)
     
  2. terri

    terri Administrator Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Messages:
    25,355
    Likes Received:
    2,093
    Location:
    In the mental ward of this forum
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I have not used that film personally, Santino.

    Someone else will have to weigh in here. PB, ksmattfish?
     
  3. P Bailey

    P Bailey TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2003
    Messages:
    439
    Likes Received:
    5
    These are both good, but I prefer Agfa Optima 100 or Konica Imprezza 50. I think these perform better than the Kodak NC or VC films and are also less expensive. If I had to chose between the Kodak160 or 400, I would take the 160. Check my 'Portrait of Maine' post in the Critique gallery. That one was taken with Agfa Optima 100 in a Holga camera.
     
  4. ksmattfish

    ksmattfish Now 100% DC - not as cool as I once was, but still

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2003
    Messages:
    7,021
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    Lawrence, KS
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I prefer Fuji color films, but I've used the Kodak stuff also, and it works fine. Do you have a specific question? Individual photographers will have different results with the same films depending on equipment and shooting styles. These are decent films. Shoot them and see if you like them.

    My opinion on film choice in general is that trying lot's of different films is fun, but generally useless. Choose a film and stick with it for 2 dozen (or more) rolls so you can actually learn how it reacts to your style, your equipment, different lighting conditions, etc... Photographer "A" may get completely different results and have different opinions than Photographer "B" using the very same film.

    When I worked at the photo lab I tried every kind of film out there. My guru said I was like the kid with the box of 128 crayons, but I still needed to get the fundamentals of the 8 crayon box down first. I was having fun, but not learning the subtle nuances of any particular film. Now I usually stick with just a few films that I feel I've learned how they react for me.

    Arista Pro 125 ( Ilford FP 4): for most of my low speed BW work

    Tmax 100: I don't use it as much because it's twice the price of the Arista 125, but it works in the same situations, and is great for long exposure night photography

    Arista Pro 400 ( Ilford HP 5): for most of my mid/high speed BW work

    Tri-X (at 1250 in Diafine): very low light BW work

    Fuji NPS 160: low speed color

    Fuji NPH 400: high speed color
     
  5. santino

    santino TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,240
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Austria, heart in Poland -->
    ok thank you all!
    so I think I won't stick with the Portra series (far too expensive :pale:)
    ...but I'm curious about the results :)
     
  6. ksmattfish

    ksmattfish Now 100% DC - not as cool as I once was, but still

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2003
    Messages:
    7,021
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    Lawrence, KS
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I originally chose the Fuji pro films because they tended to be a bit cheaper than the Kodak stuff, and I knew that both Kodak and Fuji made great film. Unfortuantely all the 120 size stuff tends to be pro priced. I wish I could get Kodak Gold 200 in 120 size. It used to be my favorite 35mm color film for my personal work; I just don't shoot 35mm color for myself these days.
     
  7. santino

    santino TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,240
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Austria, heart in Poland -->
    I bought both Portra films in 220 size, so I'll get 24 exposures with my Pentacon Six Tl (it was cheaper than two 120 rolls).
    I think I gotta try out Fuji if it's cheaper than Kodak. thanks again.
     
  8. Solarize

    Solarize TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2004
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    England
    I've shot Portra 400NC and was fairly pleased with the results, though the colours were a little too neutral for my likings.
    I week later I shot Portra 160VC and loved it. I'd say it is probably my favourite print film.

    I'm talking about 35mm though. And yeah, Portra is rather expensive but the way I see it is, if im going to spend £6 or so on the developing, I dont mind spending a pound over the odds for the film I like as its more likely to give me results I like.
     
  9. ksmattfish

    ksmattfish Now 100% DC - not as cool as I once was, but still

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2003
    Messages:
    7,021
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    Lawrence, KS
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I just tried some Fuji NPC 160. I guess it's supposed to be Fuji's version of Portra VC. Can't say I liked what it did for skin tones (very reddish). I'll be sticking with NPS for portraits and weddings.
     
  10. mygrain

    mygrain Friend to nose goblins everywhere

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    3,660
    Likes Received:
    25
    Location:
    in a cool dry place
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I'm an Ilford HP (B&W)and Fuji NP(color) kid myself. I used big yellow initially-the portra range specifically- but found not only was it more expensive but the cheaper pro films from the formentioned two companies worked MUCH better for me. Better color and contrast for me.
     
  11. santino

    santino TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,240
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Austria, heart in Poland -->
    mygrain: I think it was Kodak's intention to create an low-contrast film with "real" colors.
    But meanwhile I can only judge it by it's reputation, gotta try it out first ;)

    thanks for your comments!
     
  12. airgunr

    airgunr TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2004
    Messages:
    846
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Delavan, Wisconsin, USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I've shot a few rolls of the 160 and 400 in NC, VC and UC Porta. I did like the results I got with them.

    Now I am pretty new to trying anything else but standard Royal Gold film so I am not well versed in the options either.

    I am now just experimenting with Fuji Velvia 50 and Kodachrome 64 slide film. I have been very impressed with the Velvia and want to try the faster versions.

    I'd post some pictures but my main computer is down and I haven't got the scanner hooked up to this one.
     

Share This Page