New Portra: What do you think?

B

bwcolor

Veteran
Local time
4:39 PM
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
2,348
Location
S.F. Bay Area
View My Gallery
I'm firmly rooted in the new Ektar 100 for 35mm color, but have hoped for a bit more speed for MF. My MF Portra processing is still a work in progress. I love the Ektar look and have been trying to create the same with the Portra.

What do you think of this new film.

Any good examples??
 
If you're scanning, you can make any film look like any film... The 400 will have a bit more grain texture than the Ektar, but in MF that's less of an issue...
 
Very different indeed. A superb film but MUCH less critical than Ektar.

Then again, I've never understood those who say, "I want a similar look to..." It NEVER happens, unless you set the parameters of 'similar' quite wide -- sometimes so wide as to be meaningless.

Cheers,

R.
 
JeffGreene said:
What about Fuji Pro 400H? I've been very happy with the results.
Click to expand...

I tried a roll of Portra NC 400 and a roll of Fuji 400HC and by comparison, I thought the Fuji looked consistently flat and dull. The Portra really popped. Not scientific tests, Just me walking around shooting pictures.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Very different indeed. A superb film but MUCH less critical than Ektar.

Then again, I've never understood those who say, "I want a similar look to..." It NEVER happens, unless you set the parameters of 'similar' quite wide -- sometimes so wide as to be meaningless.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

It is a matter of preference. It isn't about expecting identical results. So, parameters of 'similar' are quite wide. That is why I have been working through a number of rolls just playing with parameters. Of course, with certain subjects I might prefer more muted colors and lower contrast, so my original statement was with regards to a general preference. I can do this with Ektar by changing exposure... as you have pointed out on your website.

and yes.. The NEW Portra 400..
 
I like the old Portra 400s (400NC and VC) more than Ektar. I've shot a couple of the rolls of the new Portra just this week, but haven't seen the results yet. However, I've not been disappointed with any of the Portra I've ever shot (400NC-2, 400NC-3, 400VC-2, 400VC-3, 160VC-2, 160NC-2, 800-2, and 800-3), so I'm expecting this will be good too.
 
bwcolor said:
It is a matter of preference. It isn't about expecting identical results. So, parameters of 'similar' are quite wide. That is why I have been working through a number of rolls just playing with parameters. Of course, with certain subjects I might prefer more muted colors and lower contrast, so my original statement was with regards to a general preference. I can do this with Ektar by changing exposure... as you have pointed out on your website.

and yes.. The NEW Portra 400..
Click to expand...

Too wide for me to understand/see, with most films.

The only answer, I think, is exactly what you've been doing: trying different films at different exposures.

I've shot about 10 rolls of new Portra so far and am mightily impressed -- but I see almost no resemblance to Ektar.

Cheers,

R.
 
Roger:

Agree completely. Amazing film for the speed. Wide latitude. Not Ektar.. but maybe that is as it should be since this is the fast grandchild of what I use to use for my event photography in the seventies... what was it.. Vericolor??
 
How does the new film compare to the NC version? I really love that film ( 160 and 400 ) and am considering getting a bunch of it before it's completely gone. However, I'm wondering if it's worth it to buy a discontinued color film if the replacement is close enough ( or an improvement ) to not matter.
 
Kodak claims that New Portra is between NC and VC. They suggest that with A/D processing, the desired results can be had in software. I also think that this film is finer grain and perhaps a bit more dynamic range. I've not used it enough to get a really good feel. Just shot some family photos, but it is worth the effort. Why buy a film that is going, when the new film may just be a better product? Try it and tell us what you think.
 
I was never dissatisfied with the dynamic range of the old film, although I shot more of the NC160 than the NC400.

I've always like the flesh tones of NC160.
 
I love this film. I am not an expert but I love the colors I get from my 120 mamiya 7 with this film. I have to experiment more with portraits, so far. have used this film for city-land scapes shots. I am very happy to hear that the film is being received positive by experts. I for sure will use this film till the end.

Happy shooting.
 
Major thumbs up for the new Portra. I've been through one box so far, and it's the most forgiving film I've ever used. A few shots I took were a little iffy on proper exposure so I bracketed, and could hardly tell there was a difference in the final scan.

The last four shots in my photostream at the moment are new Portra. http://www.flickr.com/photos/alflauren/5287550852/in/photostream/
 
I've just started in on my first 120 propack-- I can't really tell what I need to know yet because the real test for me is how well it prints in the darkroom on fuji ca paper which I'll know soon, (my hope is that he but the lower contrast should make it much better than ektar in that regard.)

So far its obvious that the latitude is the best in any colour film I've ever used and for practical purposes the grain is as fine as fuji160s.

This looks like at least from a technical standpoint it can easily replace both the 160s and 800z I currently shoot. (Though 800z has a unique look I will miss)


Just wish it was as cheap as ektar though.
 
Here are some high-resolution ([FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]5902x4815) scans from my Mamiya 7 with the new film pushed by Richard Photo Lab to 1600 and scanned on a Noritsu. Not putting these forth as "great" shots: just testing the new film before using it for anything important. These scans have been unaltered by me and are as they came back from the lab except for resize.

1. [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Slight drizzle, cloudy lighting conditions.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]
amanda-1.jpg


[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]1a. 100% crops
100percent.jpg


[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]2. Mixed light in a coffee shop. Most of scene is Tungsten but she's getting cool diffuse window light from a cloudy day as the key.[/FONT]
amanda-2.jpg


2a. 100% crops
100percent2.jpg


3. I was much more fully in the Tungsten light here than my wife in the previous shot, so the lab could correct more fully for Tungsten. Yes, I look like a goober.

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

p.giannakis
Colour Film Photography - Colours fading
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
julio1fer
julio1fer
Roastchestnuts
Tiny Voigtlander 35mm f3.5 Aspheric
2 3
Replies
54
Views
6K
Yokosuka Mike
Yokosuka Mike
ChrisPlatt
How do you cut your negatives?
2 3
Replies
56
Views
4K
Doug A
Doug A
PatrickT
How long do we think digital Leica M cameras will last?
5 6 7
Replies
130
Views
8K
Dogman
Dogman
Bololoco
New to camera repairs
2
Replies
25
Views
875
Muggins
Muggins
Back
Top Bottom