Discussion in 'Color: Film, Paper, and Chemistry' started by Helen B, Feb 17, 2006.
Kodak's press release.
Can't believe this
A few days ago it was "Film is dead, gone, won't last more than 2 years" from Kodak CEO, and now they are "commited" again
Either that idiot is compleatly ignorant of what is going on in Kodak, or
they are all a bunch of liars
I keep telling you.
You have to look at the audience the Kodak CEO was talking to. I woudn't get overly upset about his words.
nothing is true...everything is permitted
Interesting release. It sounds like the new Portra 800 is the first of the two electon emulsion still films (like Vision 2 motion picture film). The new base is also good news. I just hope it curls a lot less than the old stuff.
I loved the fat grain of the old/current 800 film. Pulled 2-3 stops and developed within an inch of not developing anything at all produces as flat, desaturated and grainy an image as anything captured on colour film.
I wish they'd bring back pro1000.
Interesting they are using a pro film in single use cameras. Kodak portra films are great.
For another perspective of this.
Now I remember why I stopped going to Photo.net.
Yuppers, sounds about the same as the last time I visited P.Net, same ole' same ole'
Probably not. I suspect that the single use camera film (MAX 800?) and Portra 800 are quite different. The MAX films used in single use cameras were designed for extremely wide latitude, even at the expense of anything else. They will produce a printable (not necessarily good) image at anything from about EI 50 to EI 1000, but the color, gradation, and general image quality suffer. The Portra line of films has traditionally had less latitude (but still a lot), but a lot of attention has been paid to image quality.
Kodak: "the fastest professional 800-speed film on the market"
thats interesting... Maybe they should tell us just how MUCH faster it is than regular 800 film! Of course Fuji still sell the fastest 1600 colour film... ;-)
Seriously, the old Porta 800 was nice. We've used if for concert photography, and prefered it to the Fuji 800. Look forward to the new stuff.
I think Portra films were developed around skintones, the rest of the colors just ended up how they ended up, pretty unique, but misused a lot by the same people that complain about Portra films.
...God I haven't used 160NC in ages, nothing brings back memories like 160NC
I love the Portra 160NC, in fact I just 5 bulk rolls of it from a friend that fell for the dark side, got them for a song...
I love it..
I take it back. I looked at the Kodak website and at the technical data sheets for both films. They are remarkably similar. Both have a latitude of about 4 stops. Unlike the other Portra films, the color sensitization of Portra 800 is just like MAX 800, with the red sensitive layer also sensitive (at about -20db) to blue and green and the green sensitive layer also sensitive (at about -15 to 20 db) to blue. The difference between Kodak amateur and Kodak professional films used to be only that the amateur films were pre-aged for more consistent results when kept in the camera for long periods. Maybe that's the case here too.
IDK what that 'db' is you are referring to. Never heard of it in relation to films.
Also, the myth of pre-aged film is really persistant but nothing more than a myth.
Pro and consumer films are slightly different, but pre-ageing is not one of the differences. It is mainly in pushability (see notes on this on the EK web site) and in LIK and reciprocity failure.
There is a keeping factor taken into account in the formula. There is no such thing as pre-ageing.
LIK = latent image keeping?
Yes. The typical consumer keeps film in a camera for up to a year or more sometimes in a hot car. The pro knows better. So, the LIK parameters are adjusted through changes in chemical addenda.
Separate names with a comma.