Jump to content

Portra 400 - Changed the game for colour neg film


Rolo

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 48
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • 1 month later...

Just scanned some 35mm and the results are breathtakingly better than the old 400. Pity my composition and timing was totally off (I'll discuss this in another thread shortly), but the colors and grain are magnificent, and barely distinguishable from the old Portra160NC.

It's also really forgiving in mixed artificial lighting.

 

Incredible, lovely film - truly luscious! A lifesaver for dark Swedish winters (and dull Spring)...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Back on January 7 this year I made some optimistic comments about Eastman Kodak (EK) when it was trading at about $6.00 - its latest close was at $3.19

 

At this time of year, in 2009, it touched a low of $2.00

 

There is this discussion about the current situation in the Wall Street Journal:

 

UPDATE: NJ Investor Group Seeks Sale Or Turnaround At Kodak - WSJ.com

 

and see this

http://www.rbj.net/article.asp?aID=186789

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dan, I do not get the sense of your posting as it does not contribute in any way to this thread. Sorry, to say so. But there is another one on this forum regarding the financial situation of Kodak. Feel free to join the club there.

 

Kind regards

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

tried to buy the new Portra in Barcelona today, no chance :( Casanovafoto don't know him, Arpi has no idea :confused:

 

Yogi

 

The web page from kodak Spain is selling right now the new Portra 400. Both 35 and 120 format. Take a look.

 

Cheers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve

 

The sense of it is that it is interesting. And others have commented in this thread on the topic. See:

 

holmes 7.12.2010

alun 8.12.2010

plasticman 8.1.2011

 

Nonetheless, after reviewing the posts to date, I agree that it is not in the mainstream of the thread.

 

However the assumed superiority of your comment is offensive. You could have sent me a PM if you wished to chide me, and to direct me to another club elsewhere.

 

Public reprimands do nothing to make new members feel at home.

 

And thank you Plasticman for joining in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve

 

The sense of it is that it is interesting. And others have commented in this thread on the topic. See:

 

holmes 7.12.2010

alun 8.12.2010

plasticman 8.1.2011

 

Nonetheless, after reviewing the posts to date, I agree that it is not in the mainstream of the thread.

 

However the assumed superiority of your comment is offensive. You could have sent me a PM if you wished to chide me, and to direct me to another club elsewhere.

 

Public reprimands do nothing to make new members feel at home.

 

And thank you Plasticman for joining in.

 

I responded to your earlier comment with a flippant, throw-away (though true) response because frankly there wasn't really much more to be said about the matter in this particular thread.

 

Reviving the doom-and-gloom gets short-shrift for a reason: namely, you could go through pretty much any thread about absolutely anything on the film-section of the forum from the last (say) ten years and find that, if the thread grows to more than ten or so posts, the eleventh post will be about the imminent death of film.

People here have heard thousands, if not tens of thousands of times before that film is absolutely, imminently, definitely, we-promise-tomorrow, okay-the-day-after tomorrow, correction-yesterday, dead as a doornail, gone for ever, dodo, dinosaur, DEAD.

 

That's why people get irritated. You'll have to excuse us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...