Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,205   Posts: 1,531,694   Online: 1154
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30
  1. #21
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,649
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    One thing to keep in mind with regard to the cost is what you get to do instead.

    For paid gigs like weddings and portraits I simply don't have enough time to do the backend stuff myself, I need to hire that out regardless of the medium shot.

    Given that need, RPL is dang cheap compared to the alternatives.

    The other thing I like about RPL is that they listen and remember. If I tell them I want my future orders to lean warmer or cooler or lighter or whatever its as good as done.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

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

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Ventura, California
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    421
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by F/1.4 View Post
    ...400H has been temperamental with me in the past, but I'm going to keep tweaking it and see if I can get something at least consistent, like what Jose Villa does. In fact, the pastels he gets, is one of the reasons I've started shooting film...
    Have you tried any of the new Kodak Portra 400 then? Quite a beautiful film, seems to be finer grained than 400H and takes underexposure better, at least from what I can see. Fuji 400H was a good film in its day, not knocking it. I shot some portraits on it back in Alaska. I just think that if you're after "good pastel" type colors (i.e. the opposite of Ektar and your Frontier scanned 160S posted here), try some of the "New" Kodak Portra 160 and 400. It has to be the new stuff, though for the better grain/latitude that I'm talking about - no "NC" or "VC" designation. I must say, the 160 just looks nearly flawless to me for a portrait film.
    Too bad I REALLY like slides, LOL!

  3. #23

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    235
    Quote Originally Posted by markbarendt View Post
    One thing to keep in mind with regard to the cost is what you get to do instead.

    For paid gigs like weddings and portraits I simply don't have enough time to do the backend stuff myself, I need to hire that out regardless of the medium shot.

    Given that need, RPL is dang cheap compared to the alternatives.

    The other thing I like about RPL is that they listen and remember. If I tell them I want my future orders to lean warmer or cooler or lighter or whatever its as good as done.
    I see what you mean no doubt, but i'm fast enough and good enough at the computer, not to mention when it's things like color correction, I don't have so much stuff where i'd have to contract it out.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jedidiah Smith View Post
    Have you tried any of the new Kodak Portra 400 then? Quite a beautiful film, seems to be finer grained than 400H and takes underexposure better, at least from what I can see. Fuji 400H was a good film in its day, not knocking it. I shot some portraits on it back in Alaska. I just think that if you're after "good pastel" type colors (i.e. the opposite of Ektar and your Frontier scanned 160S posted here), try some of the "New" Kodak Portra 160 and 400. It has to be the new stuff, though for the better grain/latitude that I'm talking about - no "NC" or "VC" designation. I must say, the 160 just looks nearly flawless to me for a portrait film.
    Too bad I REALLY like slides, LOL!
    My main film of choice is Portra 400. Incredible stuff, but it's got a totally different rendering:


    Also, straight off the Frontier.

  4. #24
    brucemuir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Metro DC area, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,265
    Images
    4
    dude, 1.4
    I think you will do well in the incredibly competitive field of wedding work.
    Nice comps.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by F/1.4 View Post

    Also, straight off the Frontier.
    I am not sure whether the Frontier helps or it is just the film but the colours are beautiful.
    The way you see lighting is also great!

  6. #26
    hpulley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Guelph, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,214
    Images
    75
    I love Ektar for its vibrant colors and high contrast and Portra for its more neutral tones but I find for pastel tones, overexposing Fuji Reala works well. Portra 400 overexposed doesn't go pastel as it has such great latitude but if you can't get Reala (only available in 120, perhaps large format) then try Portra 160 as it has much narrower latitude than the 400 so you can get some pastel on overexposure and the opposite effect with underexposure (developed normally).
    Harry Pulley - Visit the BLIND PRINT EXCHANGE FORUM

    Happiness is...

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Mission Viejo, California
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    1,442
    Thanks Harry, I'll try overexposing Reala next time I use it.

    I shot 120 Ektar and Reala back to back a couple of months ago in the same light and the Reala came out colder and less lively. It kind of put me off but I'd like to give Reala another try (well, since I still have 8 rolls left!).
    - Bill Lynch

  8. #28
    hpulley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Guelph, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,214
    Images
    75
    Pastel says toned down, less lively to me and overexposing it worked well, better than overexposing Ektar.
    Harry Pulley - Visit the BLIND PRINT EXCHANGE FORUM

    Happiness is...

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    88
    Quote Originally Posted by F/1.4 View Post
    So i've never had much luck with 400H, and I had never tried the 160S before, but WOAH! When I got these back, I immediately ordered a pro pack of each for my trip down to Santa Barbara next week!!!
    Congratulations, nice shots!

    I have always achieved excellent results with Fuji Pro 400H. Shot dozens of weddings and portraits shootings with it.
    Excellent results printed on Fuji Crystal Premium RA-4 paper.
    Fuji Crystal is the benchmark for RA-4 papers, best archival stability and excellent color reproduction.
    My professional lab does always an outstanding job printing on this paper.
    Compared Portra 400 printed on Fuji Crystal to Pro 400H printed on the same paper.
    Lots of rolls in different shooting conditions. Used Portra 400 and Pro 400H parallel.
    The prints from 400H on Fuji paper do look a bit more natural, a bit better, more precise color reproduction.
    400H has a bit more sharpness and higher resolution, Portra 400 a bit finer grain.
    Overall the differences are small and you need huge enlargements to identify the differences.
    But Pro 400H cost much less per roll than the very expensive Portra 400.
    Therefore I will stay with Pro 400H, because overall better value to me.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Ventura, California
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    421
    Images
    1
    Yes, both Pro 400H and the new Portra 400 are quite nice. I have a feeling the results would have been nearly the same, but slightly favor the Kodak film if the paper was Kodak Endura Lustre or something like that. I mean, it makes sense the films will be almost identical quality at this stage in the game, but each would favor their own brand of paper (one would think).
    I'm much more into shooting slides, but the great news is, they are both $5.99 a roll at B&H, so those into neg films can shoot whichever they like without a financial penalty one way or the other!

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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