Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,571   Posts: 1,545,501   Online: 1220
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Oxfordshire, UK.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,214
    I've just printed the new Porta 400 for the first time this evening. Nice colours, but I'll have to wait until tomorrow to see for sure.I printed 10x8 from a 645 neg and there's no grain at all. But then the older VC & NC Portras also had no grain when I printed them at this size. The new film prints on a different filter pack than the older versions which is what I was expecting anyway, every different Portra type I've ever printed has needed a completely different pack. I wish Kodak would design the whole Portra family to print on the same channel as Fuji does with its pro line. Anyway, nice film, not sure if it's terribly different from Fuji 400H, mind.


    P.S. please excuse my non-subscriber status: my subscription lapsed earlier this week and I need to wait until next month to renew.
    Steve.

  2. #12
    benjiboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    U.K.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,828
    Quote Originally Posted by BetterSense View Post
    But with a half-frame camera, an 8x10 print is already an 11X enlargement.
    Yes I know your question was about half frame and I apologize if I was deviating off the point a little, but I was speaking in general and Kodak Portra NC and VC is pretty fine grained now the NC 160 has about the same grain structure as the new Portra 400, and although I don't have a half frame camera I've had about half of a 35mm Portra 160NC blown up to about 8x6 with acceptable results but I understand your legitimate concern about half frame, the point I was trying to make was that too many people agonize about film having super fine grain when the maximum size prints they ever get is 6"X4".
    Last edited by benjiboy; 02-11-2011 at 03:04 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    Ben

  3. #13
    lns
    lns is offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    435
    I got some this week from Freestyle in 35mm. I ran a quick test roll at a local lab, and the 4x6 prints look very nice. The grain is very fine at that small size of print. I did not run the new film side by side with the old film, but I looked at previous 400VC shots processed by the same lab, and I see a definite improvement in the grain, which already was very good.

    I purposely underexposed a few shots to see what the film can tolerate, and it looks fine at EI 800 and okay at 1600 without push processing.

    I think it's definitely worth a try. Both Adorama and Freestyle had it in stock when I was looking last week, as did a local store.

    -Laura

  4. #14
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    Is is available at Freestyle. I saw it on the shelf when I was in there today.

    The 400 VC and NC were fine in grain. I would imagine that the new film is the same or even finer.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  5. #15
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,367
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    435
    I just put a roll of it through my Contax G2. Looking at the 4x6 prints, I can almost not tell the difference between it and Ektar 100. It's that good.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,301
    Here is a crop(770x699) from a 2240x3360 Fuji SP2000 minilab scan of a 35mm neg. Looks pretty good.

    Edit: add techie data, Nikon F3, micro Nikkor 200 f4 AIS, Sunpak 622 with the ring flash attachment and F3 module for TTL metering.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails F1000017cut2.jpg  
    Last edited by Bob-D659; 02-12-2011 at 12:12 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  7. #17
    Metroman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    On the beach - Dungeness area.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    113
    I have not shot a roll of colour film since 1969 but the new Portra 400 MF has piqued my interest especially after seeing this:

    Johnathan Canlas Photography he has some more pushed examples in his Personal work stream.

    I'm wondering how the 35mm variant would push.
    Andy
    Per Mare, Per Terram
    Filmus Monochromus | Project Double-X | Daily Blog

  8. #18
    lns
    lns is offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by Metroman View Post
    ...

    I'm wondering how the 35mm variant would push.
    Just one person's opinion, but I found that, processed normally, an EI of 800 (or a one-stop push) gave very nice results. An EI of 1600 was useable but not great, although it probably would improve if push processed. I was very impressed with the film at 400 and 800. This was the 35mm film.

    Let's all help the cause and try it.

    -Laura

  9. #19
    Metroman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    On the beach - Dungeness area.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    113
    Thanks Laura.
    Andy
    Per Mare, Per Terram
    Filmus Monochromus | Project Double-X | Daily Blog

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,789
    Images
    2
    So here's what I'm basing my opinions on. I shot 3 rolls of Portra, one each of the new stuff, 400NC, and 400VC. All were developed normally and scanned at 4000x6000 by Precision Camera. You can see the full scans if you click through any of the pictures and look at the original sizes. I did a series of exposures on each film of some color charts, ranging from roughly 4 stops under to 6 stops over. I also shot each film under tungsten lighting (nominally set at 3200 K) with and without a KB6 (80D) filter partially correcting it. Unfortunately, the light shifted during the test, so the framing isn't the same for each roll, but it still might give you a sense of the films' differences.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/tgray1/...7625883911861/

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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