New (2025) Portra 160 120 ESTAR base vs. old one on acetate

[grunf]

Anyone noticed changes in the new rolls? should I look for old expiring ones or buy the new with confidence that it's equally beautiful?

 

[Lachlan Young]

You're worrying about irrelevant stuff.

Buy in-date film and use it.

And remember that all Portra sheet formats have been on Estar since day 0. This is not unproven technology.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Yes, there will be a difference in quality. Estar is a superior more stable base than acetate. It's an improvement.

Kodak makes Estar sheeting themselves; they apparently had to buy triacetate stock from some other party. But a switch over would have meant some procedural changes at the right point in time. The time has apparently come.

 

[MattKing]

Yes, there will be a difference in quality. Estar is a superior more stable base than acetate. It's an improvement.

Kodak makes Estar sheeting themselves; they apparently had to buy triacetate stock from some other party. But a switch over would have meant some procedural changes at the right point in time. The time has apparently come.

More than just procedural. The films need a fair amount of re-design in order to accommodate the differences in substrate.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Procedural change, re-designing, what's the difference? It takes time and money regardless. I'd imagine that all the changes in feed roller tension would be one of the challenges.

 

[LomoSnap]

Many photographer friends told me that the new ESTAR Portra will have some changes in color.
I don’t know if this is true or just a psychological illusion. The Portra in my fridge is not finished yet, I will buy a new to try later.

 

[koraks]

I'd imagine that all the changes in feed roller tension would be one of the challenges.

Subbing. That's the difference.

 

[halfaman]

I noticed this change this past weekend while loading Jobo reels. It is easier to load initially but a bit more difficult to put it to the end of the reel to load two 120 rolls. I have some rolls mounted that never happened with triacetate. Scanning and printing is pending. I think Portra 400 base has also changed.

AFAIK triacetate was purchased and ESTAR is produced internally by Kodak. So that would be another reason for the change.

 

[MattKing]

AFAIK triacetate was purchased and ESTAR is produced internally by Kodak. So that would be another reason for the change.

There are two main suppliers of triacetate left in the world, with one being in Europe and the other in Japan (I believe).
And the price and availability of the triacetate is closely linked to supply of petro-chemicals - something that has been subject to a lot of disruption in recent years, particularly in Europe.
Bringing substrate production in-house presents a whole bunch of advantages to Kodak.

 

[koraks]

And the price and availability of the triacetate is closely linked to supply of petro-chemicals - something that has been subject to a lot of disruption in recent years, particularly in Europe.

I think it's mostly the energy cost, really. There's been no disruption to the petrochemical feed stock supply for this kind of product. But energy costs have of course soared.
That, and from a strategic viewpoint Kodak must have decided it's probably not such a good idea to rely on a source on a different continent if a local alternative is also viable. In the end, of course, it's just a matter of an Excel sheet with two columns, and then see which figure on row 178 is lowest.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Many photographer friends told me that the new ESTAR Portra will have some changes in color.
I don’t know if this is true or just a psychological illusion. The Portra in my fridge is not finished yet, I will buy a new to try later.

Kodak has been making Portra 160 on Estar base as sheet film since launch. Nobody has made any comment to the effect that there are differences and having used all forms of Portra 160 over the years, you would not be able to tell the difference. In other words, Kodak already had done the work to make them look and behave the same.

If people think they are seeing differences it may have more to do with their poor storage, exposure and/ or process habits etc than any product change.

They are probably also confused by some of the reports about the early versions of the remjet-free cinema colour neg stocks that were out in the wild a while ago.

The short answer is, use the film and stop listening to people who seem intent on feeding you conspiracies.

 

[Prest_400]

There's no way back!

Jokes aside, this and the Remjetless motion film development (largely) shows that Kodak are continuously applying R&D, even if it is to maintain the lineup. As the engineer in the Smarter Every day video mentions, there is constant work to maintain consistency due to component changes.

For reference, as I saw someone share their inquiry to Kodak about it, it's only the B&W lineup left on Acetate. IMO in still films, PET/ESTAR seems more beneficial for the archival and dimensional stability characteristics and hope they eventually migrate the B&W to it.

 

[Lachlan Young]

There's no way back!

Jokes aside, this and the Remjetless motion film development (largely) shows that Kodak are continuously applying R&D, even if it is to maintain the lineup. As the engineer in the Smarter Every day video mentions, there is constant work to maintain consistency due to component changes.

For reference, as I saw someone share their inquiry to Kodak about it, it's only the B&W lineup left on Acetate. IMO in still films, PET/ESTAR seems more beneficial for the archival and dimensional stability characteristics and hope they eventually migrate the B&W to it.

The only Kodak colour materials still on triacetate are probably those that have cinema negative uses.

What it (more importantly) says is that demand for roll film products (i.e. 135/ 120) coated on clear base is such that demand is outstripping supply, and it suits Kodak to shift to a (better for all purposes, apart from a propensity to destroy cinema camera mechanisms if it jams) product that they make metres away, rather than importing from Germany.

 

[grunf]

I think I got all the possible answers: It's the same, it's better, it's worse, it's just different.

@halfaman let us know your results

I see myself using less Portra rolls in the future...

 

[DREW WILEY]

I curse the decade when Estar based Ektachrome 64 ended, and all the chrome sheet films by both Kodak and Fuji were on dimensionally unstable Triacetate. They were hell to keep register with. That annoyance finally changed with the introduction of E100G, Astia 100F, and Velvia 100F. Provia never did switch over. By comparison, nearly all black and white sheet film has been coated on PET base for quite some time. Even in an 8x10 sheet film holder, there is significantly more risk of sag or bowing with acetate than with stiffer polyester base.

No need to be grumpy, grunf - Kodak and even the entire printing industry already answered your question decades ago. Acetate had no advantage except giving way more easily in an automated film winder, movie camera, or projector rather than the gears etc themselves stripping if the film gets stuck. For still photography, polyester has numerous advantages, including the long-term stability of the base itself. Use whatever film you want; but I think you're greatly underestimating Kodak's exceptional level of R&D quality control.

 

[Lachlan Young]

I think I got all the possible answers: It's the same, it's better, it's worse, it's just different.

@halfaman let us know your results

I see myself using less Portra rolls in the future...

Let's keep this simple: Have you ever used Portra 160 in sheet formats?

Yes or no?

Otherwise you have nil knowledge of the long extant (and carefully engineered) lack of difference between Estar based Portra 160 and Triacetate based Portra 160.

Having used other Portras (800 in particular) either side of the Estar switch, I think you are willingly allowing yourself to be mislead by people who do not understand the materials.

 

[grunf]

Am I allowed to ask if someone did a comparison between 2024 and 2025 portra 160 in 120 format?
No one here has done it, it seems, so I'm waiting for halfaman.

 

[dokko]

Am I allowed to ask if someone did a comparison between 2024 and 2025 portra 160 in 120 format?
No one here has done it, it seems, so I'm waiting for halfaman.

the shifts due to different storage condition (slight) and lab process control (slight to severe) variations are most likely going to be much larger than any differences occurring from Kodak switching over to different film base.

and that's before going into the topic of scanning, which makes all the other aspects pale in comparison.

 

[DREW WILEY]

grunf - Any DIY web-style comparison is apt to be light years behind what the factory itself can do. Scanning variables alone can turn web conclusions into a hopeless bellyflop. And being a CN film, only persons with a very high level of RA4 printing skill could prepare worthy comparison prints worth viewing in person.

Back when a comparable transition with chrome film occurred, going from triacetate Ektachrome S sheet film to estar-based Ekatachrome G, the transition was almost seamless, except for the slight decrease in grain with the latter product. Similarly, when Fuji transitioned from triacetate Astia to PET Astia 100F, they accompanied the transition with an improvement in grain as well; but the color characteristics maintained tight continuity.

 

[Samu]

Only problem with ESTAR base compared to more traditional acetate base is its tendency to curl. Otherwise, this is not an issue in still photography. In movie film it will cause some problems. First, it can break the camera if it jams. Secondly, EARAE film can´t be spliced with cement splicers.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Only problem with ESTAR base compared to more traditional acetate base is its tendency to curl

This is not inherent to Estar bases. It is engineered in to some where it is needed (e.g. to replicate the core set properties of triacetate in cinema print film). Sheet film base is very flat, and the Estar Kodak 135/120 I've used are well behaved. The polyester base Lomo films seem to have been coated on the print film base however (annoyingly curly). Unlike Triacetate, polyester bases won't conform to roll shapes purely with time, they need to be manufactured to conform.

 

[pentaxuser]

I noticed this change this past weekend while loading Jobo reels. It is easier to load initially but a bit more difficult to put it to the end of the reel to load two 120 rolls.

Any idea why this would be? You'd think that if it's easier at the start then whatever makes it easier there would still apply at the end or is there something in this new base that makes it more resistant to tighter curves such as are met at the centre of a reel? Or might it be that as you describe the end loading as being only a bit more difficult there might have been a cause that was particular to the state of that reel at the time ?

Thanks
pentaxuser

 

[DREW WILEY]

The tendency of 120 film to excessively curl when you wish it really didn't is often related to low humidity, regardless of the base type. In other words, the same film might behave differently in this respect depending on the travel and storage conditions after unsealing the rolls.

In thicker sheet form, polyester is stiffer and lies flatter than triacetate, just like Lachlan already pointed out. And acetate actually shrinks over time.

 

[koraks]

Any idea why this would be?

I doubt it has much to do with the base material. 120 and sheet film is coated on both sides with gelatin. One side obviously for image-making, and the other side to counter the curl that you'd inevitably get if you were to coat only one side. So "counter-curl", in a way. The interactions between these coatings would affect reel-loading characteristics as well as curl characteristics. Much more so than the actual base material that's inside the sandwich.

Having said that, some materials have a better mechanical memory than others. Roll film is (surprise surprise) rolled up, so the film tends to 'remember' the curl.

 

[DREW WILEY]

That "curl memory" is why I cut away specific roll film images worthy of being printed and store them under flat pressure in advance. Or flat negative sleeves could be used for the same purpose. It also applies to my dogma of dual glass negative carriers.