Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,850   Posts: 1,582,856   Online: 746
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Central Virginia, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    540

    FAIL! Portra 400 at 1600

    Now, I've pushed Portra 400 before, never with push processing though. So I shot a roll at 1600, no ev adjustment, just Aperture priority. Then processed for 3:45 (pushed one stop) and now the results, grainy, very horrible.

    I have another roll ready to process done on the same day. Should I try to push it more or less, kinda of at a loss as to why this is not working for me.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 1600-2.png   1600.png  

  2. #2
    tomalophicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Canberra, ACT.
    Shooter
    Sub 35mm
    Posts
    1,562
    Images
    24
    The grain ain't too bad. I'd be more worried about the green skin.

    What were the results when you underexposed but didn't push-process? Maybe if they were OK go with that.

  3. #3
    polyglot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    South Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,334
    Images
    12
    It looks like the blue layer has completely failed to expose there, or you've scanned it badly.

    I see all these "Portra at 1600 is great" posts, but frankly they all look pretty bad (no dynamic range, bad colour, washed-out, tinted shadows) to me compared to Portra at 400. Sure, there's an image, but it doesn't mean the film achieved that speed or that it looks good.

  4. #4
    brucemuir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Metro DC area, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,264
    Images
    4
    Don't forget that when you "push" or process c41 for longer than recommended time that you are playing with color balance.
    The separate color layers will develop to a density that it wasn't designed for.

  5. #5
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,852
    If you want ISO 1600, why didn't you start with Porta 800?
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  6. #6
    hpulley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Guelph, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,214
    Images
    75
    If you're going to push it, why not push it the two full stops?

    Did you need to shoot at 1600 or did you just do so for kicks?
    Harry Pulley - Visit the BLIND PRINT EXCHANGE FORUM

    Happiness is...

  7. #7
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,796
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Just to be clear pushing is a development thing, not an exposure thing.

    Shooting a 400 speed film at 1600 is simply a 2-stop underexposure, nothing more. The bottom 2-stops of shadow detail that the film would normally have caught at 400 is sacrificed/given away to get 2-stops of aperture for DOF control or 2-stops of speed to avoid a blur.

    Pushing increases the separation of what is caught but can't create shadow detail out of thin air. A 1-stop push might save 1/3-stop of those 2-lost stops. A 2-stop push maybe 1/2 to 2/3 of a stop.
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

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

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Central Virginia, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    540
    Quote Originally Posted by markbarendt View Post
    Just to be clear pushing is a development thing, not an exposure thing.

    Shooting a 400 speed film at 1600 is simply a 2-stop underexposure, nothing more. The bottom 2-stops of shadow detail that the film would normally have caught at 400 is sacrificed/given away to get 2-stops of aperture for DOF control or 2-stops of speed to avoid a blur.

    Pushing increases the separation of what is caught but can't create shadow detail out of thin air. A 1-stop push might save 1/3-stop of those 2-lost stops. A 2-stop push maybe 1/2 to 2/3 of a stop.
    I kinda get this, any good references you can suggest for more info on this?

  9. #9
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,796
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    How about Ansel Adams?

    The physics of silver image development haven't changed.

    Color film is essentially a three layer silver B&W film where the exposed silver developed just like with "Normal" B&W and special chemicals (CD4) are used to create/develop the different dye colors in each layer in proportion to the developed silver.

    The silver is then bleached to change it back to a form that can be fixed out of the emulsion.

    After the film is fixed all the silver is gone and only the dye image remains.
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

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

  10. #10
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,534
    Images
    65
    When I print this type of photo or scan it, I give it a touch of color correction. This one needed a tad over what the normal scanning would give. On easel, I would have added a touch of red to eliminate the greenish cast.

    Nothing wrong with the photo at all given what you did.

    PE
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Fixed photo.jpg  

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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