Recommendations: Portra NC or VC?
My wife, Theresa and I are taking a quick trip down to FL over the upcoming MLK long weekend.
Of course, we're expecting sunny skies and warm temps!
For B&W I'm planning to bring the CV R2S with 35, 50 and 85mm lenses using HP5+. I'm also going to bring the F100 with both a 28mm and a 35-70mm zoom for color shooting.
For color shooting, since I've already arranged for the sunny skies, I've settled on bringing some Portra 160 for the color film.
The question is: NC or VC?
I'm mainly planning on outdoor shooting rather than taking family snaps - but may take some of those too. My first inkling is to use NC - any thoughts?
NC has nice smooth tonality for portraiture. It doesn't have the "zing" for other apps. Take VC, even your family happy snaps will be nice.
I would not use either of them for general photography. The films are very demanding.
Kodak 100UC is so much easier to handle.
Thanks for your advice. I took this "grab shot" with 160NC last September:
Originally Posted by sbelyaev
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Originally Posted by Zathras
Thanks. I'm leaning toward the NC. My guess is that the VC is mainly intended for "flattering" portrait shots of the bride and "happy couple" that brings out the makeup and rouge etc.
BTW: I think this film is amazing - particularly the way... (APUG gods please forgive what I'm about to write)...it scans.
The Great Yellow Father isn't kidding when he says this film has "enhanced" scannability.
I'd still be interested whether anyone would recommend VC instead.
I'm probably the ignorant minority here but I shot the four free Portra rolls Kodak sent us last year and I'm buying the VC. I find the NC too flat - color wise - for my taste. I like the extra punch in the color rendition even for landscapes and cityscapes. Keep in mind I'm living and working in South Texas in an area heavily influenced by Hispanic culture and the love for bright colors on everything. Something that you might keep in mind if you're heading into the greater Miami area. Color is always subjective.
Originally Posted by sbelyaev
Are you kidding? Portras are the easiest films to deal with. You can underexpose them almost two stops, and over-expose them maybe five stops without significant image degradation!
At any rate, George, I would say go with the NC if you are going to shoot high-contrast subjects, as may be the case in Florida. VC has more saturation, but also a tad more contrast. But the extra kick in the colors of VC is nice as well, just watch for shadow detail.
I use NC all the time for flash photography (on-camera with diffuser, for events), which is a very contrasty light setup.
Using film since before it was hip.
"One of the most singular characters of the hyposulphites, is the property their solutions possess of dissolving muriate of silver and retaining it in considerable quantity in permanent solution" — Sir John Frederick William Herschel, "On the Hyposulphurous Acid and its Compounds." The Edinburgh Philosophical Journal
, Vol. 1 (8 Jan. 1819): 8-29. p. 11
My APUG Portfolio
Here's another vote for the NC. Does that help?
It is much easier to scan UC100 than any of those portras.
Originally Posted by mhv
In terms of grain they are very similar.
I don't like the look of portras in high contrast situatins (the shadows are too dark). NC gives muted colors.
I doubt that there are better studio films than Portra, but for snapshots, particulary in sunny and colorful Florida, UC line of kodak film could be a better choice.