Portra 400 NC vs Ektar 100

[italy74]

Hi

I realized I completely forgot to post here two shots of the same subject I took 10 days ago in my home town with two different films.
It's St. John's belltower in Chiavari, Liguria, Italy
I admit I've been surprised by the more saturated colours of Portra (which is also recognizable for the more grain in shadow areas) than Ektar, despite of the same place and moment. Printed are even better.

Kodak Portra NC first
FM3A - Nikkor AIS 75-150 F/3.5 - Portra 400 NC - Polarizer
1/500s - F/11 - -0.3 EV

Kodak Ektar 100
1/250s - F/8 -0.3 EV

I have another shot with the Portra but it's not relevant here.

 

[bwcolor]

I thought that Portra NC was being discontinued.

 

[Tim Gray]

Portra 400NC is being discontinued. However, there's still a fair amount of it available for sale and in freezers.

 

[sper]

I think if their marketing is correct we'll find that Porta 400 is pretty more like NC than VC.

I love the NC films for the most part. I'm always trying to lower contrast with my color films, as I'm shooting in bright daylight a lot.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Being in front of a small laptop makes things a bit uncertain... But it looks like your Ektar shot is a bit overexposed, and you Portra shot has a yellow component coming from the polarizer. I think the differences in tone come from both things, different filtering and exposure, but not from film designs... Ektar and Portra 400 NC are by definition and by ISO too, very different in color saturation if precisely exposed, and Ektar has more saturated color...

Cheers,

Juan

 

[Mcary]

I think if their marketing is correct we'll find that Porta 400 is pretty more like NC than VC.

I love the NC films for the most part. I'm always trying to lower contrast with my color films, as I'm shooting in bright daylight a lot.

According to what Kodak has put out the differences between Porta NC and VC became smaller and smaller with each new version. Which lead to the current version of Porta being released as a single film rather then as NC/VC versions as was done in the past.
That and the simple fact that the current market likely isn't large enough to support both versions.


Mike

 

[bwcolor]

My primary film of late for color has been Ektar 100. I've shot a few rolls of the New Portra 400 and it isn't Ektar. It does come closer to Ektar with regards to grain/granularity than 400NC, but the colors are much more saturated. You can adjust exposure, as above, to greatly reduce Ektar saturation.

 

[italy74]

Being in front of a small laptop makes things a bit uncertain... But it looks like your Ektar shot is a bit overexposed, and you Portra shot has a yellow component coming from the polarizer. I think the differences in tone come from both things, different filtering and exposure, but not from film designs... Ektar and Portra 400 NC are by definition and by ISO too, very different in color saturation if precisely exposed, and Ektar has more saturated color...

Cheers,

Juan

Ciao Juan

of course a difference in exposure is possible, although I tried to record them and shoot more or less from the same identical place,, it's possible final shot might have been +/- 0.5 EV than the other but in general, even if it was my mistake, what a nice mistake if Portra saturates colours so well !

 

[nightfly]

I'm a little confused why you'd compare Ektar 100 to Portra 400 rather than say Portra 160 NC. Seems like a more fair comparison.

 

[italy74]

Ciao
My aim was NOT comparing strictly Ektar and Portra, yet I had the opportunity to take the same shot with two different rolls (the last frame of one and the first of a new roll) and I wanted to share it with you: different results aside, the two good news are the total absence of grain for the Ektar and the very nice colour saturation for the Portra NC (I'd have expected from the VC, eventually)

 

[bensyverson]

How did you scan these? The scanning technique almost certainly explains this discrepancy.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Ciao Dino,

I just wanted to thank you for sharing with us those images: same image with different color films is something I really enjoy, and I wish it was more common here on RFF... Cool!

Cheers,

Juan

 

[italy74]

Ciao
they were scanned at the lab, I don't think they have a drum scanner but I don't find it to be a bad scan overall, no ? ( I've had much WORSE scans than this)

 

[bensyverson]

They're fine scans, but you can't really draw any serious comparisons based on scans done by someone else... One day, the scanner operator will prefer more contrast—the next day, less. It doesn't tell you anything about the films per se.

 

[italy74]

I see and you're right, yet I wouldn't go that deeper. If prints (and scans) are fine and often done the same way, I tend to consider THAT way THE way Portra or Ektar works for me. Then it's a "Like / don't like" thing. Theoretically right ? Maybe not. It works? Sure it does, until I go to the same lab.

 

[bensyverson]

Oh, of course—ultimately it comes down to what works for you. And everyone should run their own tests based on their own workflow!