Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,696   Posts: 1,482,540   Online: 946
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Ventura, California
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    421
    Images
    1
    Hi Richard,
    I am just about the enter the world of color printing myself...Wil from here has sent me the Nutek processor! :-) Getting excited.
    Anyway, from what I could research - try Kodak Portra 160VC or Ultra Color 100 - and print on Kodak Ultra Endura paper. I don't think there will be anything muddy about that combo! At least, that is what I plan to try first. I sure love the look of slides as well. And I also shoot manual Minolta gear. Some41 thing about a well exposed slide shot with a Rokkor prime lens. A slice of heaven. :-)
    Well, I think the more saturated Kodak C-41 films with the Ultra Endura paper will give you the punch you're looking for.
    All the best,
    Jed

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    123
    Thanks Jeddiah et al,
    I think I am going to have to try Kodak Endura again and I will try Glossy from Morco, I assume there stock is fresh. I have tried Kodak Portra films in the past, 160NC, 400VC and 400NC. I found them quite grainy and contrasty with punchy colours though. From my results am I right in thinking that like slides, I should really give Kodak less time in the soup than fuji. My fuji negs are always softer and much smoother grain wise.
    P E have you ever processed Fuji at home (I use a Jobo) If so, do you give it less development than Kodak?
    Thanks to you all,
    Richard.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Ventura, California
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    421
    Images
    1
    Richard, that was certainly true of the older portra films. However, Kodak has re-worked them, and the grain is quite fine now, especially the 160 version. The VC does have decent color punch, but I think 100UC would be even punchier if you're looking for "a slide on print film" type look. I noticed you shoot a lot of 400 iso - I mainly shoot lower, ie 100 or 160, but I've seen some great results from Kodak 400UC. Its grain is quite fine for a 400 iso film - might give that a try. Very punchy, but skin tones seem to be OK with that film, unlike some other punchy films which look good for landscape, but as soon as you throw a person in there, watch out. :-)
    Jed

  4. #14
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,710
    Images
    65
    To all;

    The Formulary has all of the equipment to have a full workshop on color processing and printing but has never seemed to have any demand for it. The Jobo and drums are safely stored away in a back room not generally used for workshops and not generally seen by the students.

    If there is enough interest, I might be willing to conduct such a course, but I cannot do it in 2008. It would probably have to be in 2009 to give me and the Formulary time to ramp up on this. IDK how long it has been since they used their Jobo, nor do I know the condition of the facility to do color. I just never checked.

    I would give free tutorials here, but my space is all taken with emulsion making and coating equipment, so I'm down for the duration. (Free exept for materials)

    PE

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Live Free or Die
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,215
    Images
    87
    I hope it's not too far off topic, but what is the best choice for home-user RA-4 chemistry? No kits seem to exist from Kodak. Should I assemble my own kit from the Kodak components, or go with one of the packaged kits from other companies? My volume for color printing would be fairly low, I think.

  6. #16
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,710
    Images
    65
    Kodak sells RA-RT developer-replenisher in 5L and 10L kits and Blix in 1 gallon kits. Unless things have changed, I can get either locally and our stocks come from Atlanta GA.

    PE

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    123
    PE can i ask you the question again? Have you processed fuji at home or work and did You find that it needed more development than Kodak? I'm asking about C41 not E6; I always give Kodak less first development in E6.
    This question is open to all of course.

  8. #18
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,710
    Images
    65
    When I needed Fuji negatives for work at Kodak, I always had 'approved' Fuji processing done on their products to avoid any possible argument about the authenticity of the test materials or results that were found from the work.

    When I have used Fuji here myself, I have sent them out to the local pro lab. So, I have only run Kodak products in C41 myself. My understanding is that Fuji negative products can be intercut with Kodak products with no problem, but that there are several problems with E6 products from Kodak and Fuji being intercut. It is my understanding Fuji has given solutions to this to the general public.

    PE

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    123
    Thanks PE, It's just that I find the grain and contrast consistent with overdevelopment is a feature when I develop Kodak materials. Now I know that many say that Kodak is grainier than fuji but, Kodak wouldn't. I just feel that if I developed less I may be happier with the Kodak products. Guess there is only one way to find out. I may have a word with my local Kodak branded minilab guy, he's a nice chap, but I do not like to pester when he knows that he aint going to make no dosh out of me.
    Richard.

  10. #20
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,710
    Images
    65
    Richard;

    I've talked to a lot of pros and done a lot of evaluations myself. I give Fuji an edge in reversal films and Kodak an edge in negative films. This has seemed to be true ever since Fuji jumped into E6 and C41 in the 80s. I would personally say that they are probably too close to call if you make identical comparisons, which most are not inclinded to do. So, the results I read are subjective, but the tests I have run are based on exact color measurements using people, color charts, definition charts and doing grain and sharpness studies with the proper instruments.

    Granted, I have not done much of that latter in several years, but I can speak from use subjectively to say that the situations with the two companies products remains much the same as what I observed when I was running the tests regularly.

    As for what you observe, contrast and grain of ALL products goes up with overdevelopment and down with underdevelopment. This is true of color and B&W. It is also a fact that grain goes up with underexposure and down with overexposure. This is the nature of the photographic system itself.

    PE

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin