Kodak Professional Portra 400

[fotch]

What you are missing is the history. When the hybrid process was allowed, there were endless threads on this versus that and "mine is better than yours". Most were happy with the separation. If a vote were taken today the results would be the same. There are many other sites that handle the hybrid process issues.

Steve

Steve, there are already endless threads at APUG, that have a life of their own but accomplish little or nothing more than adding to the post count of the posters. Whats difference does one more thread make?

 

[Bo73]

Edited away - as it hadn't anything to do with Kodak Portra film

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

I just find it odd that people claim that they want to promote the use of film, yet they want to exclude a large segment of film users. I do print B&W in a traditional darkroom, but for color, I use a hybrid process. I guess that makes me a bad person!

Robert, you have been here going on six years, and have made 465 posts as of this moment - more than I have made. You must have been saying something relevant to the charter of this site. How, then, are you being "excluded?"

It's been said many times before, but there are literally millions of locations on the Web to discuss the computerized digital/hybrid photography of the last 20 years. There are only a handful of sites remaining - and maybe not even that many - to discuss the preceding 164 years of non-computerized chemical photography.

The reason this site is so successful is precisely because of that distinction. Why do you feel so compelled to tell Sean - whose decision it is - that he should throw that unique distinction away? Does this site appear to you to be a failing concern because of its focus? Is it languishing for want of interest or participation?

Would you similarly go to a forum where the charter was oil painting, only to tell the membership that they are excluding watercolor painting - which, by the way, is faster and cheaper and more convenient to practice, don't they realize - at their own peril? Then suggest they change their charter to include it so that you can discuss it?

Would you feel similarly excluded if someone then graciously pointed you in the direction of a site whose charter was purely watercolor painting? And where the discussion centered precisely around the topic which you found so interesting?



So, hey! How about that new Portra 400 film!?

Ken

 

[Photo Engineer]

Did any of you notice that the new film we are supposedly discussing is easier to scan?

Yes, Kodak is acknowledging a hybrid workflow in this redesigned film just as they have in Ektar and other recent introductions.

So, what do you think?

And, as I said above, I use a hybrid workflow as my entire darkroom is now configured for B&W process design and emulsion making!

PE

 

[wblynch]

Did any of you notice that the new film we are supposedly discussing is easier to scan?

Yes, Kodak is acknowledging a hybrid workflow in this redesigned film just as they have in Ektar and other recent introductions.

So, what do you think?

And, as I said above, I use a hybrid workflow as my entire darkroom is now configured for B&W process design and emulsion making!

PE

Well, I have found that anyplace I can conveniently take my color film to be processed and printed, they scan it before printing.

There may be millions of film photographers left but very few optical printing options.

I ~wish~ I could get optical-only prints but that's only available by mail order from a very few places in the US, and at a much higher cost.

I think I have read that all the color printing papers have been changed to be optimized for laser exposure.

 

[fotch]

Did any of you notice that the new film we are supposedly discussing is easier to scan?

Yes, Kodak is acknowledging a hybrid workflow in this redesigned film just as they have in Ektar and other recent introductions.

So, what do you think?

And, as I said above, I use a hybrid workflow as my entire darkroom is now configured for B&W process design and emulsion making!

PE

Yes, I noticed and think that is great news, although I already think film scans are better that a digital camera. I still prefer the analog process for printing when I need a print but now a days, getting a photo that can be emailed or posted on-line negates a lot of printing.

The only reason not to use analog is speed, and just like the old Polaroid was quicker but never better, hybrid is a solution for many.

Long live film!

 

[Ektagraphic]

Optical printing is still available but to most people it must be mail order. Jim Weupper at Superior Custom Color Lab (who is a sponsor here) does outstanding work at incredible prices!

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Folks, we're getting lots of reports for this thread, which is ostensibly about the new version of Portra 400. Please keep it to that, since we'd rather not have to edit the thread, and we would like the thread to be a useful resource about this new film if someone is just looking for that sort of information through a search engine. If you want to argue about the place of hybrid photography on APUG, please take it to the Soapbox.

 

[Tim Gray]

I've thrown in my two cents about the hybrid thing here a couple times.

What are the good sites that really discuss hybrid workflow nowadays? Photo.net has some decent discussions in their film forum. Largeformatphotography does, but it has such an LF bent (understandably) that make it unsuitable for some discussions. Hybridphoto has some great people on it with a lot of knowledge, but in my opinion is really concentrated on making digital negatives for alternative processes. Have I missed any?

What many of those sites don't have are people like PE, AgX, Ian, etc who really know a lot about the inner workings of film. I've had questions in the past for PE about color dyes in films and interactions with scanners, etc., but this isn't the venue for it. So where do I start that discussion? On a site he doesn't frequent?

I'm not saying APUG should open that can of worms. I'm just making an observation on one of the downsides of the current policy. I still think A LOT of hassle would be saved if a sticky post at the top of the film forums with FAQs/links to scanning resources would diffuse a lot of the annoying questions.

 

[Figital Revolution]

For what it is worth I fully agree with Scott and wrote on this topic for several years on Figital Revolution... I am taking a much needed break from that site but still believe as I know many do that we are a stronger community when all photographers are included and all discussions are welcome. These new films showcase the amazing possibilities of analog and the hybrid workflow in a time where pure digital seems to get all the attention... I for one plan of trying the new Portra when available and Yes I will be scanning it.

Cheers-
Stephen Schaub

 

[AgX]

Back to the topic (if this post is not considered off topic too):
By what means is the scanability of this new film improved?

 

[SuzanneR]

Folks, we're getting lots of reports for this thread, which is ostensibly about the new version of Portra 400. Please keep it to that, since we'd rather not have to edit the thread, and we would like the thread to be a useful resource about this new film if someone is just looking for that sort of information through a search engine. If you want to argue about the place of hybrid photography on APUG, please take it to the Soapbox.

What David said...

If we need to have a conversation about the best places on the net to discuss hybrid processes, then, as others have stated, let's start a thread in the Soap Box.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I've thrown in my two cents about the hybrid thing here a couple times.

What are the good sites that really discuss hybrid workflow nowadays? Photo.net has some decent discussions in their film forum. Largeformatphotography does, but it has such an LF bent (understandably) that make it unsuitable for some discussions. Hybridphoto has some great people on it with a lot of knowledge, but in my opinion is really concentrated on making digital negatives for alternative processes. Have I missed any?

What many of those sites don't have are people like PE, AgX, Ian, etc who really know a lot about the inner workings of film. I've had questions in the past for PE about color dyes in films and interactions with scanners, etc., but this isn't the venue for it. So where do I start that discussion? On a site he doesn't frequent?

I'm not saying APUG should open that can of worms. I'm just making an observation on one of the downsides of the current policy. I still think A LOT of hassle would be saved if a sticky post at the top of the film forums with FAQs/links to scanning resources would diffuse a lot of the annoying questions.

Please start a new thread in the Soap Box. See Dave Goldfarb's post #161 and SuzanneR's #165!.

 

[michaelbsc]

Please start a new thread in the Soap Box. See Dave Goldfarb's post #161 and SuzanneR's #165!.

Done. (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[Sirius Glass]

Done. (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Thank you. I want to hear about the new Kodak films and what will be no longer available => NOW!.

When I want to get into a hybrid photo discussion, I will go to the appropriate thread.

Hijacking a thread is not fair to the OP and other interested participants.

Steve

 

[Ektagraphic]

The film's notes do say that it can be optically printed...but so can any film. It will be interesting to see how well it does. Ektar does very well optically.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Ektar is about as saturated as UC 400 was, but the color balance is not the same. Of course neither is the speed.

UC 160 and UC 400 had the balance of the Porta families.

 

[Scott_Sheppard]

By what means is the scanability of this new film improved?

From Eastman Kodak...

"Proprietary Advanced Dye Layering Technology delivers reduced grain in shadows and higher signal-to-noise ratios when scanning low light scenes. Extended highlight latitude delivers greater flexibility when lighting extreme situations, and enables up to two stops more image information to be extracted from scene highlights. Digital “dodging and burning” is a very powerful tool in the colorists’ toolkit, now made more powerful by the wider dynamic range of the KODAK Professional Color Negative Films. Its wider latitude further differentiates film capture from the limited dynamic range of digital capture. When capturing scenes with very high dynamic range, KODAK Professional Color Negative Films produce images with extended density ranges. If traditional 10-bit scanner data encoding schemes are used to digitize films having extended density range, highlight information stored on the film could be lost."

Chief Takeaway... Scan at 16 bit or larger.

FILM ROCKS !!

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Blatantly abusive...

Ken

 

[Q.G.]

[DELETED]

P.S.

Hadn't seen David's post, so i have deleted the above (really did that to please Steve, but don't tell him that ).

My thoughts on the new Portra: want to see it first, because we are dealing with a visual medium, not one that uses words.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Some are so dense that they never learn. He is abusing his status as a partner while he is lowering the respect of the APUGgers at large.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

He is abusing his status as a partner...

Yes.

I have never before used an ignore function. And I have never clicked the Report Post icon. But this is so egregious...

For the record, I am not a drug addict, either.

Ken

 

[SuzanneR]

I think this thread has run it's course.