Medium Format color in 35mm

[nightfly]

A lot of artistic color photography I've seen in galleries and in some advertising has this beautiful soft color look that I think is characteristic of medium format neg film (Portra I believe). It's a retro unsaturated look that you often see in movies as well (just saw Sophia Coppola's Somewhere which has it) a little washed out but has a warmth to it.

Just wondering if it's possible to get this look in 35mm, maybe Portra 160 NC with the right exposure/post? I've shot some Portra 400 NC in 35mm but it's not quite what I'm looking for, it's a bit too bland. Not quite saturated/warm enough. Hard to describe but perhaps someone will know what I mean. It's a very analog look though I'm sure digital wizards can produce it as well but it is very film like.

 

[ottluuk]

Well, the emulsions are pretty much the same in 135 as they are in 120, so what you are seeing probably comes from the physical size of the negative - the combination of more detail and smoother gradations recorded by the film. Your best bet is to use as fine-grained film as you can find, carefully sharpen in post and maybe desaturate a bit, like setting negative "Vibrance" in Lightroom or its equivalent in your favoured editor.

Also, MF cameras are rather cheap these days.

 

[jamais]

I got that kind of look with Fujicolor NPS 160 (35mm). Maybe it's worth a try?

 

[Jamie123]

Most art color photography that has that ''soft'' look is actually 4x5 or even 8x10.

The short answer to your question is: No, you can't get MF (let alone LF) gradations from 35mm. However, you can't do some things to get a bit closer to the look you want. Shoot fine grain color neg film with natural saturation (Portra NC) and use old single coated lenses. You can also achieve some of it by lighting the scene yourself. Use continuous lighting for a soft look. KinoFlos are good and so are Arri HMI's with a Butterfly to diffuse the light. Get's pretty expensive, though.

All this will never give you the result you want, though, so why not just get into MF? If you like soft gradations and low contrast go for a Hasselblad or if that's too expensive a Rolleiflex.

 

[venchka]

Lightroom & Photoshop, and most digital editing software, allows you to desaturate an image.

 

[nightfly]

I do have a Rolleicord V but for the type of hand held street photography I do, a Leica is really optimal. I'm not too thrilled with composing in a square, did it for a long time but it feels very constricting. I realize you can crop it to a landscape but I'm spoiled from composing in the Leica viewfinder.

Will play around a bit with some Portra in the Rollei and see if that gets me where I want to go tone wise. If so than maybe a Mamiya 7 or similar although I had a Mamiya 6 in the past and it was just a little too slow for the way I like to shoot. Brilliant color though. Have some shots of glaciers in Patagonia on Agfa's since discontinued color slide film that are really amazing.

I have also experimented with Photoshop and de-satruating and playing with the color balance and levels but there is I think you need the information in the film to start with and it's not really there.

Thanks for the suggestions so far. Will get a hold of some Portra 160 NC in both formats and see what I can do.

All this will never give you the result you want, though, so why not just get into MF? If you like soft gradations and low contrast go for a Hasselblad or if that's too expensive a Rolleiflex.

 

[bwcolor]

Can you post, or link to an image such as you are describing?

 

[nightfly]

Sure, Randall Phenning who posts here has some good ones. I belive he uses a Mamiya 7 and Portra:

http://cargocollective.com/randallphenning/#554625/smile-you-woke-up

 

[bwcolor]

So, now you know how to get what you want. The New Portra 400 is quite desaturated and should fill the bill. I doubt that you can fully get what you are looking for in 35mm. I like the film and it is fine grain for the speed. You might also try over-exposing Ektar 100.

http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/reviews kodak ektar 100.html

 

[Tim Gray]

The scanning and post processing also impact this a lot. I've gotten some 400NC shots back that were more contrasty and saturated than 400VC shots I had done at other labs.

The gradations aren't going to be as smooth in 35mm because grain is more intrusive. Try shooting 400NC or the new 400 at 320 to help minimize the grain a tiny bit. Or 160NC at 125. If those are a bit too bland, then bump up the saturation a tiny bit in post. As long as it is close, you should be able to get the look you want in Photoshop.

 

[nightfly]

I tried a bit with 400NC but my results were a bit too harsh:

 

[raid]

160NC is an excellent film for such a purpose.

 

[oftheherd]

Sure, Randall Phenning who posts here has some good ones. I belive he uses a Mamiya 7 and Portra:

http://cargocollective.com/randallphenning/#554625/smile-you-woke-up

If that's what you're talking about, try defocusing any of your favorite films, or using a defusion filter, and see it you like the effect.

 

[Tim Gray]

I don't see anything in the examples you posted that I would attribute to the harshness of the film. Maybe harshness from the scene or the way you shot it...

The photos you reference earlier have much shallower depth of field and more controlled highlights (which is probably something you can adjust in the scanning stage). Part of the look of those shots I would attribute to the fact that it's medium format as well, not because of the color per se. Particularly the shot from behind of the man on the street.

I also find minilab scans tend to be 'harsher' looking because of their sharpening. Don't know if that is relevant.

 

[nightfly]

Yes those samples were shot mid-day probably with a CV 28mm 3.5 which is a fairly contrasty lens. I did the scanning myself but do need to learn color better. I like a lot of contrast in my black and whites but am drawn more to lower contrast in color and need to adjust my shooting/scanning technique.

Thanks for the tips. The light this time of year lends itself more to the look I'm going for.

 

[jpberger]

"shot mid-day"
earlier in the morning/ slightly overcast will help a lot.
The examples you linked to are appear to be morning light. (afternoon/evening is warmer)

"I like a lot of contrast in my black and whites but am drawn more to lower contrast in color and need to adjust my shooting/scanning technique. "

optical printing might be an easier way to the look you want than scanning-- better labs will be able to do analog proofs and prints for a reasonable fee.

if you don't print bigger than 8x10 the advantage to mf won't be that big so you can get what you want from 35 (hint: small prints in big frames look way better than big prints in slightly bigger frames)

Scanning is nice if you want to get the biggest print size possible relative to neg size but in terms of subtle tonality and colour I find optical prints superior. YMMMV

 

[unclescarMT]

The uncoated Tessar in my Rollieflex Automat gives a soft, almost pastel rendering when used with Portra 160NC. I find the results most satisfactory. Flares like a beast, though.

 

[nightfly]

My prints generally go bigger than 8 x 10 and I like to be able to tweak in Photoshop and print myself on my Epson 3800 so I can control things.

I'll put some Portra through my Rolleicord V and see what happens and then work on trying to emulate this in 35. I do like the tessar look and in fact I just borrowed my neighbors Industar 61 for my M4-P and am anxious to see how the color negs come out of it.

Haven't shot with the Rollei in a long time but it's a nice light camera and I've always been happy with the results although it requires a more methodical approach then the Leica and lends itself to different types of photos.