Kodak Portra 160 NC or VC?

Discussion in 'Color: Film, Paper, and Chemistry' started by rogueish, Mar 22, 2005.

  1. rogueish

    rogueish Member

    Messages:
    877
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Location:
    3rd Rock
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Kodak Portra 160 NC or VC, what's the difference between these two 120 format films?

    I'm also looking for a decent colour 120 format film for landscapes. Some shots will be broad wide open fields with rolling hills, some will be shady (open and dense) forests and others will be river/waterfall/rapids.
    Which film do you use?
     
  2. David H. Bebbington

    David H. Bebbington Inactive

    Messages:
    2,364
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2004
    Location:
    East Kent, U
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    According to Kodak, one gives Normal Color, the other gives Vivid Color! VC is meant for studio use, NC for outside (uncontrolled lighting, according to Kodak). I personally use 160 VC for landscapes and really like the color rendition (although I must admit I have only scanned my negs and not made chemical prints).

    Regards,

    David
     
  3. bobfowler

    bobfowler Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,440
    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Location:
    New Jersey,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I like the NC for skin tones with electronic flash - specifically when using studio strobes. I must confess to using 400VC when shooting weddings. The extra color saturation helps pop the image when shooting available light in churches.

    For landscape work, I'll stick with B&W! :smile:
     
  4. panchromatic

    panchromatic Member

    Messages:
    218
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Location:
    Lansdale, PA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I've heard people describe NC as (No Color) but I think its ignorant to say that, comparied to VC which has more color saturation. I personally like VC more than NC, but I shot the UC in the new packaging and I like it, though I found its only good in portraits, not a landscape film IMHO.
     
  5. Sanjay Sen

    Sanjay Sen Member

    Messages:
    1,249
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Location:
    New York, NY
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I have used the NC (35mm only) and like the skin tones that it renders. I do not (usually) shoot indoors and do not use a flash. I have not tried VC but I found NC quite adequate for my landscapes as well.
     
  6. David A. Goldfarb

    David A. Goldfarb Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    17,919
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2002
    Location:
    Honolulu, Ha
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    One is "normal color" and the other is "vulgar color." Actually, it's not that bad, but in flat light, you might want the bit of a boost you get from the VC. I lean toward neutrality. NC skin tones are great.
     
  7. Tom Duffy

    Tom Duffy Member

    Messages:
    963
    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2002
    Location:
    New Jersey
    I'd have to say "D", none of the above. The finest color neg film I've ever used is Kodak's Portra 400 UC. Low contrast, good saturation, excellent skintones and grain reputably equal to the 160 speed films. I now use this for all my color stuff except sheet sizes which aren't available.
    Take care,
    Tom
     
  8. jd callow

    jd callow Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    8,003
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Milan
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    For landscapes which I don't shoot I would go with 100uc (if I have a tripod) or 400uc, Reala would be my 3rd choice and NPC would be 4th. I don't like vc much, but I do think NC is a very fine film, but not the best for landscapes.