Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,732   Posts: 1,515,288   Online: 883
      
Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 51
  1. #1
    ted_smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    uk
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    396
    Images
    1

    Kodachrome and other quality films - which to use for portraiture and weddings

    Hi

    Quick question about quality colour film.

    1) Kodachrome - I read that this is a superb film for portraiture, weddings etc. I note though that is has to be sent to the US for development, and art of the purchase cost includes the cost of developing using the rather unique method. Is it worth using.

    2) A fellow APUGer (RJ) has told me the following about quality film
    a) Fuji 160NPC - a contrasty film with high saturation - similar to Velvia but better latitude saturation.
    b) Fuji 160NPS - Soft film, really smooth skin tones (does that mean it gives that 'out-of-focus' look or does it just mean its a dreamy looking film.
    c) Fuji Reala - midway between 160NPC and 160NPS
    d) Fuji NPH400 - a fine grained fast (ISO400) film that is more neatural than Reala

    So my question this - of the 4 above, which is best for general portraiture of family, babies etc and which is best for traditional weddings with white wedding dresses etc.

    Thanks

    Ted
    Ted Smith Photography
    Hasselblad 501CM...my 2nd love.

  2. #2
    tiberiustibz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Tufts University
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,750
    Images
    5
    I would use Fuji 160S. Kodachromes may be hard to get printed, but you will be able to get very nice results with that film. I love using kodachrome for fun but I would stick with a good negative film to make prints.

  3. #3
    MikeSeb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Prospect (Louisville), KY, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,062
    Agree with @tiberiustibz; Fuji 160S (=160NPS) and 400H (=NPH400) are your best bets for the indicated purpose.
    Michael Sebastian
    Website | Blog

  4. #4
    Ektagraphic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Southeastern Massachusetts
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,689
    Images
    23
    I would use some Kodachrome and some print film. I would try some of the Portra family of films.
    Helping to save analog photography one exposure at a time

  5. #5
    tiberiustibz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Tufts University
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,750
    Images
    5
    You can always bring two cameras, one with Kodachrome and one with 160S.

  6. #6
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,526
    Images
    122
    I have only done two weddings (for friends). I used Fuji NPS160 which seemed to give very accurate colour for skin tones.


    Steve.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    139
    Kodak Portra NC is a great film for your purposes and used by many wedding and portrait photographers in the States. It is great for skin tones. I don't have as much familiarity with Fuji films but I am sure their low-contrast films work great as well.

    Tim

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,789
    Images
    2
    Portra NC - 160 and 400 are great. 800 is pretty good as well.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Valley Stream, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,216
    K-64? Not for a wedding. It's too slow. The Portra 160 and 400 NC films are popular with event (weddings, bar-mitzvah, christenings, etc.) photographers. So are the Fuji equivalents. I'd probably go for the Kodak Portra myself. The color palettes of the 160 and 400 NC films are as close to identical as you can get, and are very nice. I don't know if that's true for the Fuji films. It might be.
    Frank Schifano

  10. #10
    ted_smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    uk
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    396
    Images
    1
    I actually intended to start my post with a 'moan' about Kodak Portra 160NC so it's funny several f you mention it when I forgot to. I shot a roll of it recently for the first time as everything I read about portraiture film seems to rave about Kodak Portra, just as many of you chaps have here today.

    However, I found my prints to lack saturation and contrast. Maybe I was expecting something that I shouldn't, but the prints just looked a bit flat for my liking. The light on the day was OK - shot at about 14:00 on a Janurary day, so the light was quite low and warm, thus my higher expectations. If you're interested in having a look at the 'standard' scans (done by a pro lab, but their options are standard or pro and I chose standard for the website gallery), the results are here http://www.tedsmithphotography.com/c...ery/index.html What do you think of them? Are they what you would epxect from Kodak Portra or have I done something wrong? They were shot at EI160, same as the ISO rating.

    Ted
    Ted Smith Photography
    Hasselblad 501CM...my 2nd love.

Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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