Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,555   Posts: 1,545,018   Online: 757
      
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 31
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    ABQ
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    127
    Kodak 160VC is very good for people and under controlled illumination. Skin tones are warm and glowing. Actually not only skin tones but colors in general. Try to use portra 160VC with your 85/1.4 with Softar I and fill flash (just a little but of fill flash).
    I tried it for landscape (high contrast) and didn't like the results. The dynamic range of the film is huge, but when all that range is compressed on the paper the results look funny. I have an impression that the film behaves like digital sensor when it comes to handling light.
    Kodak 400UC or 100UC are much better for landscape.
    I particularly like 100UC. The colors are terrific, grain is minimal. It is very easy to scan this film.
    I don't like 400VC/NC - too grainy, nothing special films. HD400 looks much better.

    I have mixed feeling about Reala. I like old version of Reala in 120 version. Superia Reala didn't impress me. In comparison with Superia Reala Kodak UC400 is as good or better film.

    For slides I'd use Velvia 50 (for its colors) and Provia 400x for everything else. For practical purposes 400x is as good as any ISO 100 slide films.

  2. #12
    Mick Fagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,841
    Images
    29
    Daniel, I have used Reala since it was originally released and have lived with all of it's changes. The current version Superia Reala, doesn't cut it for me anymore.

    I now use Portra 160NC which I currently have in 30m bulk rolls in 35mm format. I do it this way for obtaining batch matching for 18 rolls for every 30m. I think for portrait work you really are looking at subtle differences and the ability to hold a great range of tones and colours, especially skin tones. This film is superb at doing this

    I also use the Nikkor 85 f1.4 with this film and it is very good, although in some ways, the sharpness of the lens can be a bit cruel with some of the subjects in colour with this film.

    Mick.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Ventura, California
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    421
    Images
    1
    Second the motion for Kodak Portra 160VC (the new stuff). I just shot some and was very impressed. I have never shot a negative that I liked the prints from as much as I do slides...but the new Portra 160VC just might win me over and I'll be back to shooting negs.
    For slides - Try Velvia 100 (not 100F) and Kodak E100GX.

    EDIT: Don't use Velvia for the portraits! :-) I meant that just for the "sharpest" 35mm film part. You definately want to use the Kodak Portra or if you prefer slides, Astia or Kodak E100GX do well with skin tones.
    Jed
    Last edited by Jedidiah Smith; 01-06-2008 at 03:52 AM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: Portraits...doh!

  4. #14
    snaggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    325
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by sbelyaev View Post
    Try to use portra 160VC with your 85/1.4 with Softar I and fill flash (just a little but of fill flash).
    That is a good recommendation, I've actually been pretty impressed with Kodak's colour balance of late. I hope they revive their commitment to film, as its pretty nice stuff.

    Finally, you know I've never used a Softar filter.. can you post some example photo's.

    Daniel.

    PS. Here is a portrait taken with Velvia 50 (when I was a beginner to photography).. its not that bad!

    Last edited by snaggs; 01-06-2008 at 07:27 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    ABQ
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    127
    http://flickr.com/photos/90094587@N00/2171945764/

    Agfa 160,
    Kodak is much smoother.
    Last edited by sbelyaev; 01-06-2008 at 08:10 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  6. #16
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,273
    Images
    148
    No-one has mentioned the 35mm Kodak Ektar 25 color negative film, this was superb and extremely sharp. I'm not sure when Kodak dropped it.

    I've always much preferred the Fuji colour films, C41 & E6. Usually we use (wife's camera) Superia 100 or 200 ISO and the quality of optical enlargements is outstanding. For commercial work then Fuji 50D E6 has to be my all-time favourite, followed by the 100D.

    Ian

  7. #17
    PhotoJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Regina, SK, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,221
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
    No-one has mentioned the 35mm Kodak Ektar 25 color negative film, this was superb and extremely sharp. I'm not sure when Kodak dropped it.
    It came to mind, but there's no point falling in love with a film that's been off the market for 15+ years.

    I wish I had shot some of this in its day. I never did get around to trying it.
    Jim MacKenzie - Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada

    A bunch of Nikons; Feds, Zorkis and a Kiev; Pentax 67-II (inherited from my deceased father-in-law); Bronica SQ-A; and a nice Shen Hao 4x5 field camera with 3 decent lenses that needs to be taken outside more. Oh, and as of mid-2012, one of those bodies we don't talk about here.

    Favourite film: do I need to pick only one?

  8. #18
    Petri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by PhotoJim View Post
    It came to mind, but there's no point falling in love with a film that's been off the market for 15+ years.
    I wish I had shot some of this in its day. I never did get around to trying it.
    Kodak Ektar 25 (135) was easily available yet in 1998. It was very fine grained. Liked it a lot.

  9. #19
    Chazzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    South Bend, IN, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,854
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
    No-one has mentioned the 35mm Kodak Ektar 25 color negative film, this was superb and extremely sharp. I'm not sure when Kodak dropped it.
    I still haven't forgiven Kodak for that! It was truly wonderful film for miniature format. Did Kodak make it in 120 too? Not that it matters at this point--I'm just curious.
    Charles Hohenstein

  10. #20
    Matt5791's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    England, Birmingham
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    998
    Images
    17
    Another vote for Kodak 160NC - because you are shooting portraits. I now use this (and it's sister 400NC when I don't have the light) exclusively for colour wedding work.

    It really does live up to it's name as "natural colour" and the 160 is very fine grained.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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