Anyone used the new Portra 160?

film_man · May 6, 2011

So has anyone had a chance to use this film? Is it like the new 400? The review at figitalrevolution.com is interesting...hmmm.

I ordered 20 rolls of the 160, should be here sometime next week although I'm not sure when I'll be able to shoot it given my schedule next month...

AlbertZeroK · May 7, 2011

well, the 400 is amazing stuff, so I'll definately be selling some of my film stock and buying some of this to try out!

Franswa · May 7, 2011

I plan on trying some out today at a wedding I'm shooting. I may or may not report back

DarkMagic · Jul 1, 2011

First use og P160

This week i used Portra 160 for the first time in commercial studio/product photography. As seen in the added image, the film is beautiful. I have only been shooting products with it. But colorchart-images renders FANTASTIC colour reproduction. Beautiful grain and the type of sharpnes i adore. Will use it on human skin later this week or next. Thumbs up for this film, i wont miss NC or VC.

Athiril · Jul 1, 2011

Very nice.

New Portra 160 Preview #1 by athiril, on Flickr

benjiboy · Jul 1, 2011

I've shot two rolls of the new Kodak 120 Portra 160 I shot some portraits of a four year old boy with it, the skin tones are superb, I had a local pro lab enlarge one neg to 20"X16" for the boys parents that I got back yesterday the grain was none existent I'm very impressed and am going back to the shop to buy some more before they sell out. I have a pack of five rolls of the 135 version but haven't used it yet

benjiboy · Jul 1, 2011

Athiril said:
Very nice.

New Portra 160 Preview #1 by athiril, on Flickr

This is a good demonstration of how this film doesn't overcook the skin tones and how accurate they are, this girl has that pale white alabaster skin that redheads usually have, and it has reproduced them perfectly.

polyglot · Jul 2, 2011

I mostly agree with the figital dude, except I'm not really sure it's lacking in microcontrast compared to the 400. Can't say I've made a rigorous comparison by wet printing but in hybrid processing it has worked very very well (click for larger):

Both of the new Portras are absolutely excellent.

F/1.4 · Jul 2, 2011

I just bought my first roll of it today in 120. I've shot enough of the Portra 400 for it to be my absolute favorite color negative film. If the Portra 160 is anything like the 400, i'm sure i'll like it too! My only worry is that I like to shoot my CN films at a stop slower than they're box speed is, and ISO 80 isn't really too fast so i'm not sure if i'll be using it as much as the 400, especially in the Mamiya. All my Nikkors open up to f/1.4, so ISO 80 is OK. 4th of July is coming up, and the weather is going to be real sunny, so i'll probably shoot my 160 roll then and see what happens.

Athiril · Jul 2, 2011

You don't need to underrate these films imho, it picks deep deep into the shadow (even the portra 400 does pushed to 1600)

F/1.4 · Jul 3, 2011

Is that shot at 1600 and developed normally? I've shot it at 1600 than had it pushed a stop in development with no degradation in IQ.

Shot these with the Nikon 35mm f/1.4G, Portra 400 rated @ 1600, pushed 1 stop, and scanned off a frontier:

andrewkirkby · Jul 3, 2011

My first post in a LONG while...

This film looks great... I have some on order. Now, hopefully it will have the same punch that 160VC has. I might shoot some A/B of both films

Athiril · Jul 3, 2011

F/1.4 said:
Is that shot at 1600 and developed normally? I've shot it at 1600 than had it pushed a stop in development with no degradation in IQ.

Shot these with the Nikon 35mm f/1.4G, Portra 400 rated @ 1600, pushed 1 stop, and scanned off a frontier:

Shot at 1600 and developed at 4m 15s instead of 3m 15s (~+2 stop push), at normal processing both films extend deep into the shadows, iirc they are both picking out more than my dSLR at same exposure settings (and the ISO on my camera is rated 1/3rd stop slower than it really is.. according to dxomark).

RPC · Jul 3, 2011

Can anybody give any direct comparisons between Portra 160 and the NC and VC films? What's better? What's worse?

dreamingartemis · Jul 3, 2011

film_man said:
So has anyone had a chance to use this film? Is it like the new 400? The review at figitalrevolution.com is interesting...hmmm.

I ordered 20 rolls of the 160, should be here sometime next week although I'm not sure when I'll be able to shoot it given my schedule next month...

you sir have earned my admiration and respect! buying 20 rolls of something you don't fully yet know how it performs! I usually only buy them in the pro packs and only after shooting all of them will I decide whether to buy another load

michaelbsc · Jul 3, 2011

Athiril said:
Shot at 1600 and developed at 4m 15s instead of 3m 15s (~+2 stop push), at normal processing both films extend deep into the shadows, iirc they are both picking out more than my dSLR at same exposure settings (and the ISO on my camera is rated 1/3rd stop slower than it really is.. according to dxomark).

OK, so rounding it up to 200 ISO (instead of 160) so the math is easier, you underexposed 3 stops, then pushed it 2 stops in the developer. And from what I see you got awesome results.

Do I comprehend this correctly?

Athiril · Jul 4, 2011

michaelbsc said:
OK, so rounding it up to 200 ISO (instead of 160) so the math is easier, you underexposed 3 stops, then pushed it 2 stops in the developer. And from what I see you got awesome results.

Do I comprehend this correctly?

Mine are box speed. I'm talking about the 400 pushed to 1600.

Hence: '(even the portra 400 does pushed to 1600)'

cjbecker · Jul 4, 2011

I just did a family shoot with the new 160. I shot it at 100 instead of 160 and it still needs a little more over like at 80 or 50. Overall it is a fantastic film.

Franswa · Jul 4, 2011

Here are some recent shots.

cjbecker · Jul 4, 2011

Did you shoot them at box speed?

Franswa · Jul 4, 2011

cjbecker said:
Did you shoot them at box speed?

Yes, but with +1 EV

polyglot · Jul 4, 2011

Franswa said:
cjbecker said:

Did you shoot them at box speed?

Click to expand...

Yes, but with +1 EV

In other words, you shot them at about half box speed unless the scene was particularly bright.

Athiril · Jul 5, 2011

Very nice Franswa, almost forgot - did one on Portra 160 box speed, ~140 degree wide.

South Yarra Site Panorama by athiril, on Flickr

benjiboy · Jul 5, 2011

I always get great results with both the old and the new Portra rated at the boxed speed.

film_man · Jul 6, 2011

dreamingartemis said:
you sir have earned my admiration and respect! buying 20 rolls of something you don't fully yet know how it performs! I usually only buy them in the pro packs and only after shooting all of them will I decide whether to buy another load

Well to be honest, normally that's what I do but given that I don't like the Fuji 160 stuff I don't have a choice and given how nice Porta 400 turned out to be I took a chance. Anyway, believe it or not I forced myself to shoot some crap shots with 1 roll of 160 last week. It is nice, what really impressed me was how easy it is to scan when exposed at 160.

I'm off to south west England this weekend and will be shooting a box or two of the stuff so hopefully I should have some proper stuff to review end of next week...

Anyone used the new Portra 160?

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency