Kodak Portra 160

[Tim Gray]

I think we all suspected this was coming. A new 160 replaces 160VC and 160NC.



http://www.kodak.com:80/global/en/professional/products/films/portra/160main.jhtml?pq-path=2986



If it's anything like the new Portra 400, I'll be happy. But I didn't shoot a lot of 160VC...

 

[John Lawrence]

I used to shoot a lot of Portra 160VC, rated at 100 asa, and it was my favourite colour film.

It'll be interesting to see how the new one compares.

John

 

[redisburning]

Well Im a huge huge huge fan of 160NC so as long as this is close enough Ill be satisfied. If it really is improved 160NC then that's fantastic.

 

[Tim Gray]

Looking at the chart Kodak has up, it looks closer to an improved 160NC. Same saturation and contrast, but finer grain. I think I would have liked a bit more saturation, but then again, a couple years ago we didn't have Ektar 100 to give us that.

 

[batterytypehah!]

Love the Ryan Muirhead quote:

Everything I love about photography takes place behind a camera; Everything I hate about photography takes place behind a computer.

To which I would humbly add: Digital cameras are computers...

 

[shadowfox]

Excellent news!

I like Portra colors, and 160 ASA is much more suitable for us who live in places where sunlight is aplenty most of the year.

This is good news that needs to be followed by a lot of purchases. I will buy some as soon as it is available.

 

[Lilserenity]

I only see this as good news. I love 160NC, it's a superb film, but the new Portra 400 is something else, I prefer it to 400NC, and 400NC by its last version was superb.

If it has the aesthetic of 400 but in a 160 speed, we're very lucky indeed in my book.

In fact, for the sake of 1 1/3rd a stop difference between this and 400, we're lucky we just didn't get new "Portra" replacing all speeds of Portra, rated at ISO 400 take it or leave it at this stage in the game,

Vicky

 

[johannielscom]

Any chance this will be launched in 120, and (dare I say it), 220? 😱

 

[wolfpeterson]

In the FAQ: confirmed 120 and 220. Have fun! 😛

Any chance this will be launched in 120, and (dare I say it), 220? 😱

 

[segedi]

What speed would you shoot the 160 at? Would it make sense to shoot at iso 100 and overexpose a bit?

 

[Tim Gray]

I think it makes sense to overexpose color neg for two reasons. One is to give you a buffer against accidental underexposure due to sloppy metering. A 1/3 or 2/3's of a stop is usually enough here, but is less important if you are careful with your metering. The second is to get more of the exposure on the finer-grained components of the film. I think this is less important with slower films, since they are generally already finer grained, i.e. it makes more sense with Portra 800 than it does for Ektar 100.

So, I'd probably rate this at 125 most of the time, just to give me an extra 1/3 of a stop of underexposure safety. You aren't going to blow anything out. And if I forget to set the camera at 125, I'm sure it will expose just fine at 160. If previous Kodak professional films are anything to go by, you could easily go with 100 with no problem. However, I'm not sure if you gain all that much by shooting it there. This is basically what I do with Portra 400 and Tri-X - rate it at 320 when I remember, and 400 when I don't. 😀

 

[sper]

Anything they can do to make film profitable is good. Especially since we can always boost color or contrast with paper choice or by scanning.

I wish they would make a low contrast version with the sharpness of Ektar 100.

 

[PatrickT]

Good news! I've got a couple rolls of 120 on the way from a buddy at WPPI 🙂

 

[Jamie123]

I wish they would make a low contrast version with the sharpness of Ektar 100.

Well, I assume the new Portra 160 is exactly that. As for exposure, I always expose Portra 160NC at ISO100 in the studio (as I test with ISO100 instant film) and it's no problem whatsoever. It's only a 1/3 stop overexposure so it's really nothing to worry about.

 

[shadowfox]

What speed would you shoot the 160 at? Would it make sense to shoot at iso 100 and overexpose a bit?

Your camera does not have 160 setting? 🙂

Good question, I have shot 160 Portra rolls as 200 ASA in bright sunny conditions. The colors are vibrant and the contrast is higher.

But in scenes where deep shadowy patches are present, I'd say shoot it at 125 ASA to make sure that the details do not become muddy.

 

[segedi]

Thanks to all for the responses! I hope to get some and run it through the cameras this summer.

 

[Paddy C]

Neat-O.

Hoping I will be able to get my hands on some prior to my March 17 California trip. Would be nice, given the harsh light, to have a slower portrait film.

 

[fbf]

Love 160nC and 400VC...

 

[brandonmsweet]

You can easily over expose all portra films 3+ stops.

 

[slm]

There's a great review over at the Figital Revolution