plasticman Posted March 10, 2013 Share #21 Posted March 10, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I've referred to this page before while discussing Portra160 on the forum. It seems to me that a lot of variables can impact how a film image turns out, but there's nothing intrinsically wrong or 'vintage looking' with Portra. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 Hi plasticman, Take a look here color film recommendation for medium format. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
PeterGriffin Posted March 11, 2013 Share #22 Posted March 11, 2013 It's a transparency film rather than a negative film' date=' but you might try Fuli Velvia.[/quote'] Unfortunately, I've always looked at Velvia as giving 'chocolate box' colours. Have sold film for 40+ years and For me personally, Kodak always gave the most accurate colours. 160 Portra was very hard to beat and higher ASA for brighter colours and more definition. Sent from my iPad using Forum Runner Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterGriffin Posted March 11, 2013 Share #23 Posted March 11, 2013 Unfortunately' date=' I've always looked at Velvia as giving 'chocolate box' colours. Have sold film for 40+ years and For me personally, Kodak always gave the most accurate colours. 160 Portra was very hard to beat and higher ASA for brighter colours and more definition. Sent from my iPad using Forum Runner[/quote'] A Kodak film technologist once explained that the main criteria when developing a film base is that the resulting colours reflect in the skin tones of the main population on the country where it was produced ie: Germany, Agfa; Japan, Fuji; USA, Kodak . . . etc. Makes a whole lot of sense, and believe it or not, it works! Sent from my iPad using Forum Runner Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted March 11, 2013 Share #24 Posted March 11, 2013 A Kodak film technologist once explained that the main criteria when developing a film base is that the resulting colours reflect in the skin tones of the main populationon the country where it was produced ie: Germany, Agfa; Japan, Fuji; USA, Kodak . . . etc. Makes a whole lot of sense, and believe it or not, it works! Sent from my iPad using Forum Runner That loses sense, possibly, when you shoot in Australia (I do bit of that ). I prefer to choose my films, all those you name, according to what I'm shooting. eg. Landscape, stage, even people. American Kodak a great job of skin tones here, as does certain Fuji film such as 400H. Product photography often demanded Agfa (Very neutral), or Kodak Commercial I think it was called. It had high saturation. I think Ektar is the replacement but less tolerant to variations. Now digital has changed the ball game, but not in this thread. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterGriffin Posted March 11, 2013 Share #25 Posted March 11, 2013 That loses sense' date=' possibly, when you shoot in Australia (I do bit of that ). I prefer to choose my films, all those you name, according to what I'm shooting. eg. Landscape, stage, even people. American Kodak a great job of skin tones here, as does certain Fuji film such as 400H. Product photography often demanded Agfa (Very neutral), or Kodak Commercial I think it was called. It had high saturation. I think Ektar is the replacement but less tolerant to variations. Now digital has changed the ball game, but not in this thread.[/quote'] As we've very similar skin colour to Americans, I can live with that, and it's always worked for me Sent from my iPad using Forum Runner Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
karuba Posted March 11, 2013 Share #26 Posted March 11, 2013 A Kodak film technologist once explained that the main criteria when developing a film base is that the resulting colours reflect in the skin tones of the main populationon the country where it was produced ie: Germany, Agfa; Japan, Fuji; USA, Kodak . . . etc. Makes a whole lot of sense, and believe it or not, it works! Seems to make sense on first thought. But then, why did Eastman choose a company name that would work in any language (or not not work in any language)? Timo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted March 12, 2013 Share #27 Posted March 12, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Seems to make sense on first thought. But then, why did Eastman choose a company name that would work in any language (or not not work in any language)? Timo He had "sales" in mind! ... and he was right! He also understood that his major market was/is amateurs by sheer weight of numbers. Most amateurs (did) use film on their holidays. By the time they got their prints back from the holidays, their perception of the holiday was already (hopefully) glamourized. Kodak cunningly slightly saturated amateur film colour to match that perception. A savvy marketer indeed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guido Posted March 12, 2013 Share #28 Posted March 12, 2013 I am attaching an example of the lack of vivid colors and particularly vintage look that I am getting (Times Square is about as color saturated of a place as one can get). Yes, this basically looks like my own results with Portra 160. However, I actually prefer this muted representation (especially for skin tones), since the negative is easier to scan with less risk of color channel clipping. Also, I have more leeway to adjust or intensify the various color parameters in post-processing. Slide film delivers more punch out of the box, but good luck in Photoshop later. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted March 12, 2013 Share #29 Posted March 12, 2013 +1! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.