Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,755   Posts: 1,515,981   Online: 903
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35
  1. #21
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,494
    Images
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Hops View Post
    Thanks for the compliments!

    I can't wait to see if Kodak reformulates Portra 800 with this new technology! Then it would only be a two-stop push.
    Well.. I dont think a 400 and then an 800 next to it makes much sense..

    I'd much prefer to see Portra 800 get updated/replaced with a native 1600 or 3200 speed based on Portra 400 but with larger grain emulsion.. pipe dreams though.

  2. #22
    Domin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Warszawa, Poland
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by Athiril View Post
    I'd much prefer to see Portra 800 get updated/replaced with a native 1600 or 3200 speed based on Portra 400 but with larger grain emulsion.. pipe dreams though.
    Yeah, more likely it will simply get discontinued.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    48
    Images
    1
    My hope is that Kodak markets this film as an alternative to digital cameras! High-ISO has been one of the most compelling reasons that people buy digital SLRs. If they were to make a super-pushable film, there could be a resurgence in film use!

  4. #24
    yurisrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New York Metro Area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    260
    love that grain/color..wow!
    "The real work was thinking, just thinking." - Charles Chaplin

  5. #25
    Paul Green's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Hampshire UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    154
    Images
    1
    This guy seems to have made the comparisons between the new 400, vc and nc http://www.flickr.com/photos/tgray1/

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,789
    Images
    2
    That guy is me No pushing involved though. Just over/under exposure.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Shooter
    Med. Format Pan
    Posts
    46
    Thanks Tim that was fun. I like the +1.5 the best..
    Can you try some push and pull?
    John

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    48
    Images
    1
    Looking at Tim's results, I wonder if I might get better highlight detail if I were to underexpose by three stops (shoot at EI 3200) and then push by just two.

    Does that make sense?

  9. #29
    hrst's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Finland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,300
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Hops View Post
    Looking at Tim's results, I wonder if I might get better highlight detail if I were to underexpose by three stops (shoot at EI 3200) and then push by just two.

    Does that make sense?
    No, it does not make sense. It would make sense if it was chrome film or d*g*tal.

    There's never point in underexposing neg film to get more "highlight detail". If you lack highlight detail, something is wrong in your printing process, not in the negs, or you severely overdevelop the film, in which case you should shorten the development time, and INCREASE exposure a little bit if something; not decrease it.

  10. #30
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,580
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Hops View Post
    Looking at Tim's results, I wonder if I might get better highlight detail if I were to underexpose by three stops (shoot at EI 3200) and then push by just two.

    Does that make sense?
    No.

    Underexposure is a cardinal sin with negative films.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

Page 3 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