Your thoughts on Portra 160nc

[gb hill]

I picked up a roll of Kodak Portra 160nc 35mm. I wanted some of the 160vc but they were out, & the way they talked wasn't going to order any. They said every one perferred the nc over the vc. I wan't to try some outdoor portrait work. I read Kodak's take on it. What about yours?

 

[cmedin]

In 120 format, I found NC to be pretty blah and VC to be a really pretty film. Reminded me of Fuji NPH, very realistic look.

 

[afineman]

if you find the nc "bla" then try pushing it one stop, it should give you more of a vc look. personally i like the nc, i can always add contrast later if i want.

 

[Keith]

I asked a question about Portra NC here a while ago and was advised to give it a miss and go for the VC. Ok for skin tones apparently but very flat otherwise!

Mind you I never have actually used it ... I might love it ... I'm such a sucker for peer pressure! 😛

 

[cmedin]

If my choice is between ISO 80 shooting NC and ISO 160 shooting VC to get similar results, I think I'll go for the faster film 😉

 

[charjohncarter]

Here is VC though my RolleiflexT. I like it, it isn't heavy on the VC. But skin tones, still is good.

 

[gb hill]

Now i'm getting all confused? What should I rate it? How forgiving is it?

 

[gb hill]

Here is VC though my RolleiflexT. I like it, it isn't heavy on the VC. But skin tones, still is good.

John I love the balance of color in that shot. Youv'e not tried NC?

 

[cmedin]

gb hill: Shoot VC at 125 and never look back, if you're doing people shoot at 160. Just my $.02.

 

[gb hill]

I asked a question about Portra NC here a while ago and was advised to give it a miss and go for the VC. Ok for skin tones apparently but very flat otherwise!

Mind you I never have actually used it ... I might love it ... I'm such a sucker for peer pressure! 😛

Keith...thats kind of why I wanted to give VC a try. I heard the color has more pop.

 

[gb hill]

gb hill: Shoot VC at 125 and never look back, if you're doing people shoot at 160. Just my $.02.

When I get some VC I will, but I have NC. I wan't to know what I should do with 160NC.

 

[cmedin]

160NC, shoot at 100, and you get reasonable results. I really think it's flatter than anything needs to be though, and VC is what it SHOULD be.

 

[gb hill]

160NC, shoot at 100, and you get reasonable results. I really think it's flatter than anything needs to be though, and VC is what it SHOULD be.

Ok! thanks! I'll shoot it at 100. What then about development? Just normal development or what?

 

[cmedin]

Just dev it like any other C41. (Normal, yes)

 

[Doug]

I agree with the lower ISO camera setting; I do this for all C41 films to gain smoother grain, better shadow detail, and higher color saturation. Not really too critical, but I set it 2/3 stop slower than box speed; that is, 100 for a 160-speed film. But 80 or 125 would be fine too; try to see if you can see any difference, and what you prefer.

I think NC is rather bland, but good for portraiture.

 

[TheHub]

In 120 format, I found NC to be pretty blah ..

Same here. Very boring.

VC is supposed to have more pep to it.

 

[Rhoyle]

Portra NC is a studio portrait/wedding film. It's very good for doing that. For scenic stuff, it might not be really dazzling. If you want to give it a go, start out exposing it at box speed. If you don't like it, then try experimenting. I shoot a lot of 160VC for outdoor stuff and have always excellent results at box speed.

 

[einolu]

i like when people say "shoot it at 100" or something along those lines, but never explain how one should be metering. i find you can pretty much stick to what is on the box if you are using a incident meter because they seem to expose for the overall light, or if you are going to be thinking of the sunny 16 rule. reflective meters, built into most cameras, tend to notice brighter things (good for slide film but not for negative), espcially if you are pointing your camera anywhere with sky in it. i am no expert myself, i just wanted to throw that out there and maybe someone can further clarify what i am saying.

that said, i really like portra, and nc is wonderful, because i personally prefer low contrast and subtle colors. if you want punchy colors, why pay so much for portra vc and not just shoot superia, or something like that?

 

[cmedin]

einolu: Don't be silly; the argument about metering--a whole topic in itself--could be equally applied to shooting it at box speed which you advocate.

The reason I recommend NC at 100 is because with several cameras and meters it has consistenly given less flat and a little more pleasing results for me and several people I know. I bought a bunch of NC and VC some years back and didn't want to toss the NC, so overexposure it was, and it led to results close to VC at its rated speed. I think VC at 160 is great for overall shooting, and at 125 (or even 100) for some extra punch though it can mess up skintones if you're not careful.

 

[DougK]

I've never shot Portra in 35mm but have used it a fair amount in medium format. I shoot it at ISO 160 and haven't had any issues. The colors are much more true-to-life, which I think is kind of relaxing after all the hyper-saturated shots we're exposed to these days. YMMV, of course.