Fuji 160 NPS

[dwainthomas]

I gathered about 6 rolls of expired (dated 2000 & 2001) 160 NPS the other day and shot a roll the yesterday. Haven't developed it yet, but wanted to get your thoughts on it and possibly some samples shot. Being that it's about 8-9 years old, what are the possibilities of it not living up to its standard?

 

[obelix]

Have you any idee how the films have been stored? Als long as the were not over the 16 degree celcius there won't be a problem. Else you will see a color shift.

Why doubting after you bought and shot a roll?

 

[railwayman3]

The acid test is simply to have your exposed film processed.

As Obelix says, if the storage has been as specified, you shouldn't have a problem. The expiry date is nothing more than the date to which the manufacturer guarantees perfect condition with the correct storage....there's lots of latitude allowed, and the film doesn't "go bad" on the expiry date.

Obviously it's sensible not to use untested expired film for irreplaceable shots, though.

 

[dwainthomas]

I see. I'm somewhat aware of what expired film could do, but it was merely a test shoot. I'm not having any doubts about the film, I wanted to know what others thought about it.

 

[railwayman3]

I see. I'm somewhat aware of what expired film could do, but it was merely a test shoot. I'm not having any doubts about the film, I wanted to know what others thought about it.

Sorry, Digitallure, if my reply above seemed a little abrupt, wasn't intended.

I'm still not quite sure what is your question?

Fuji 160 NPS is a good film, capable of excellent results with suitable care (as are almost all modern films). The exact effects of ageing of any film after a long period past its expiry are not really predictable, it depends mainly on the storage conditions, also the speed of the film and the type of emulsion.

The results from any color neg film also depend heavily on the quality of processing and printing. Some C-41 mini-labs (or perhaps I should say the skill and training of the operator!) are OK, others are appalling, and in general the best results will be obtained from a pro lab (at a price) or by making your own prints or even, (if I'm allowed to say it ), scanning and printing d***tally if you don't have a darkroom.

I use out-dated film fairly often, but only from my own stock which has been frozen from new. I wouldn't buy unknown expired film....it's not worth the small saving when you set it against your own time, the cost of fuel, admission fees, etc., in visiting photogenic places, and the possible frustration if the film lets you down.

 

[dwainthomas]

no, no offense taken. I haven't shot film in a while. When I did, I was stuck to the "general" like film (superia 200, super hq 200 and kodak gold). Never experimented with pro film.

 

[mtjade2007]

I have bought quite some films that were about to expire or had just expired. I put them into a freezer in my garage immediately when I received them. I also bought some films that had long passed the expiration date. I put them into my freezer immediately. Now I don't remember exactly which is which, except a large portion of my Kodak Portra and Konica negative films. They are all expired now. However, so far I really do not have much problems using these films in my summer weekend trips. I actually screwed up more frequently in my own processing. I tried to replenish my C-41 developer because I have C-41 replenisher on hand. When I finally gave up replenishing and use the developer one shot only I almost never have bad negatives any more.

 

[railwayman3]

no, no offense taken. I haven't shot film in a while. When I did, I was stuck to the "general" like film (superia 200, super hq 200 and kodak gold). Never experimented with pro film.

Ah, thanks for clarifying.

IMHO, the "general-purpose" 200ASA films seem geared more towards everyday "snapshot"-type photography, lots of latitude in exposure and for less-than-optimum processing, and maybe a somewhat higher contrast to allow for use with simpler lenses in consumer cameras.

The pro films perhaps respond better to more "careful" working, accuracy of exposure and processing, and some are optimised for use in controlled or studio lighting, or where exact color-matching is needed for commercial and fashion work. All things equal, you should be able to expect the last extra touch of quality, but they're not a magic way to better photos.

I'm sure we've all seen fine photos and big enlargements taken on cheap consumer films, and poor results from professional films, it's all down to care and skill through the whole taking and processing chain.

 

[Steve Smith]

I was given ten rolls of this when I bought my RB67. It had an expiry date of 2002. I don't usually use colour negative film so I wasn't bothered with storing it in a fridge or freezer.

I used the last of it earlier this year at a friend's wedding and it came out fine. I over exposed it a bit, metering it as if it were EI 100 or 125.



Steve.

 

[Larry.Manuel]

NPS 160 used as B&W

Inadverdently, I developed [bulk-loaded] 135 NPS 160 as if it were Delta 100. My method: Exposed at EI 100, dev'd with Rodinal, 1+50, 20C, 14 min. 3 inversions first minute, then one per 3 minutes. The negatives have a moderately deep purple cast, and printed very well on colour paper at my local lab. I have not tried any conventional printing. Contrast is good and grain is very fine - much like Delta 100.

I'm well enough pleased that I will expose and develop 3 more rolls this way.

 

[wiltw]

NPS 160 is a wonderful color pallete film which I (and thousands of others) used to use for wedding coverage back in the 90's, shooting 120 format roll film. Well suited color pallete and contrast for capturing bridal portraits as well as for shooting outdoor weddings.

 

[Frank Szabo]

To add one more opinion, the Fuji product is far superior to Kodak Portra in that (to my eyes) the colors are richer and more natural plus the benefit of getting to shoot at closer to box speed. Protra (and the Vericolor varients before) liked a one stop over exposure, or shot at 80 speed when new and fresh.

I'd shoot the NPS at +1 stop and truck on due to its age. Film seems to lose some of its rated speed after a few years.

 

[mtjade2007]

I have tried NPS 160 rolls many times. I found I like Kodak 400 VC much more for my applications. I have many rolls of NPS stuck in my freezer. I have lost interest in shooting them. Next summer I will try them again. I found NPS granier than I anticipated. Kodak 400 VC are more vibrant that fits well of my taste. This really says how subjective it is in everyone's preference of different films. I am sure there are valid reasons why many like NPS.

 

[dwainthomas]

Thanks for all the info

 

[wiltw]

As I indicated earlier, the NPS was terrific for portraiture...and for that purpose you do NOT necessarily want 'vivid color' (Kodak 400VC). For other general shooting the VC might well be the pallete of choice, because the 'normal color' of portraiture film is too muted for some tastes. Same reason that some like Velvia and others like Reala