Fujicolor Pro 160C Opinions

[brianmichel]

I wanted to get some people's opinions on Fujicolor Pro 160C. I just shot two rolls of it through my Mamiya 6 and was thoroughly displeased with the results. While this is supposed to be a 'vivid' film, it seems that even at box speed things just look terrible. Colors are off, detail is not captured, I don't know I was just not impressed. Has anyone out there had better results? Is this just a case of user error? Let me know, thanks!

 

[RobertV]

This is what I got in my M7 (Leica) with pro 160C film:

Vivid colors and a high saturation. All shots are without any filter.

 

[brianmichel]

Hmm, looks like user error on my end might stick with Ektar though.

 

[RobertV]

Maybe your C41 development is not 100%. I always get these nice saturated colors with Fuji pro 160C in the mini lab (Fuji Frontier printing and Fuji developing machine) but also with my own C41 development (K54 mononegacolor). This film example is used on iso 160 but if you want some extra saturation you can over-expose the pro 160C film with 1/3-2/3 F stop.

 

[brianmichel]

I think this entire problem was user related; new camera, messing with exposure compensation, and rushing to do processing. Perhaps next time I can mix up a fresh batch of chemistry and see what happens.

 

[RobertV]

For sure, it's a very good film.
Note that all these professional films should be kept under 10 degrees C when storing the film.
This is valid for the whole pro series: 160S (less saturation) 160C (high saturation), 400H (less saturation) and 800Z (high saturation).

 

[MikeSeb]

160C is my least favorite film among Kodak and Fuji's "pro" color negative offerings. There's nothing wrong with the film per se; I just don't like the look of it. While it's saturated and crisp, to my eye it has a tendency towards a green cast that I find very unpleasant. I don't think this is related to my development, because other films developed as part of the same batch look perfect. I have found this greenish look to be stable over time, under a variety of shooting conditions, so I must attribute it to something intrinsic to the film itself.

Its Kodak analog would be 160VC, which I find far more pleasing. That, and Ektar, are my mainstays for general use. For portraiture I like 160/400NC and 400H. I prefer the 160 ISO films for their slight advantages in grain and sharpness over their ISO 400 counterparts. I find FC 160S to be the most "neutral" of all the films, but lately I've found it a bit bland for my tastes so I'm putting it aside for a while after I use up my stock.

I go back and forth between VC and NC; right now I'm tilting back towards NC. Maybe I've had enough saturated color for a while! It's good to have such a vast array of color-negative film choices.

I store mine in the freezer, taking out only a day's worth at a time.

 

[keithwms]

Brian, don't forget how your mamiya 6 is metering. It is basically frame-average metering, and how it averages depends on the lens you have mounted. If you took any of Robert's shots and trusted average metering on the mamiya 6 then you'd probably get washed out results. The cameras would see all the sky and recommend a faster exposure than you really want.

There are two remedies: one is to partially block the sky in your viewfinder with your finger, and note that this will increase the exposure. I often finger-bracket this way with my mamiya 6. The other thing you could do is rate the film at 125 or lower.... or use a handheld meter.