Over/Under expose Portra400 or FujiPro400H

[ericdan]

Hi,
I'm reading that if I rate portra or fuji pro at 200 my negatives will just become denser and I get a more saturated look. To achieve that, do I tell the lab to develop for 200iso or will that undo what I'm trying to achieve?
Same thing goes for when I shoot it at 1600. How will the look change if I have it developed at 1600 or standard?

Thanks a lot!

 

[thegman]

If you expose Portra 400 at 200, and don't mention anything to your lab, you're over exposing by 1 stop. On those film, such is their tolerance of over exposure, I doubt you'd notice any difference.

 

[Chan Tran]

If you want denser negative just over expose it. You should not tell the lab to push process your film. Push process would give you denser negative too but quality will suffer.

 

[pamelapowell]

I've had good results rating Fuji ProH at 100 and getting the lab to develop it normally as if it was shot at 400. It has really nice pastel tones (if you like that!). When I've overexposed Portra it goes more yellow, so I would stick with box speed, or maybe overexposing by a half stop at most.

If you shot either at 1600 then you would be underexposing it, and it won't look very good (especially the 400H) so let the lab know that you shot it at 1600 and want it push processed. I haven't shot Portra 400 at 1600 but believe it fares better than 400H if it is underexposed.

 

[skysh4rk]

Hi,
I'm reading that if I rate portra or fuji pro at 200 my negatives will just become denser and I get a more saturated look. To achieve that, do I tell the lab to develop for 200iso or will that undo what I'm trying to achieve?

For normal shooting I usually rate 400H at 100, so two stops overexposed, and I typically shoot Portra at about 320, which gives it enough shadow detail yet a very natural look. Portra tends to go a bit yellow when overexposed, I find. In either case I would always develop the films as normal with no pull or push.

Now, I'm far from any pro, but here are a few examples from the oft cloudy United Kingdom:

400H at 100

Dead Link Removed

Portra 400 at 320

Dead Link Removed

Same thing goes for when I shoot it at 1600. How will the look change if I have it developed at 1600 or standard?

Over the past few months I've done quite a bit of experimenting with push processing both Portra 400 and Fuji Pro 400H. If you must push, I would ordinarily recommend opting for Portra, although 400H pushed one stop doesn't look too bad, I've found. Not sure if it'll be of any help, but here are a few examples, although your own mileage may vary depending on development, scanning, printing, etc.

400H rated at 400, pushed one stop in development:

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed



Portra 400 rated at 1600, pushed two stops in development:

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed



Portra 400 rated at 3200, pushed three stops in development:

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

 

[ericdan]

Hey skysh4rk,
Thanks for your reply. That really demonstrates a lot of scenarios. I'm just wondering why would you push process 400h when you shot it at 400? Because you treat it as if it's really a 200iso film?
I tend to like the portra results better. Not sure why, I think the 400h goes really pastel at 100/200 but that maybe good for weddings etc.
I shot portra 400 at 1600 and pushed it two stops and got very pleasing results. I posted some on my blog here Dead Link Removed

I guess I just have to experiment with it like you did. Next time I'll shoot it at 1600 and process normally.

 

[skysh4rk]

Hey skysh4rk,
Thanks for your reply. That really demonstrates a lot of scenarios. I'm just wondering why would you push process 400h when you shot it at 400? Because you treat it as if it's really a 200iso film?

Yep, no worries.

If I shoot 400H at box speed or even one stop over, my lab always tells me that the negs could have used a bit more exposure, so I basically treat 400H as a 100–200 ISO film.

I tend to like the portra results better. Not sure why, I think the 400h goes really pastel at 100/200 but that maybe good for weddings etc.

They do have a slightly different look, but I find that each has its place. I have a selection of both in my fridge and happily switch between them depending on the circumstances.

I shot portra 400 at 1600 and pushed it two stops and got very pleasing results. I posted some on my blog here Dead Link Removed

I guess I just have to experiment with it like you did. Next time I'll shoot it at 1600 and process normally.

Nothing wrong with a bit of experimentation, but the photographs of Portra pushed to 1600 on your website look pretty good to me.

 

[blockend]

I shoot Fuji Pro 400H in old folding cameras with a limited range of shutter speeds and aperture settings, and those are not always reliable. It has proved to have considerable latitude to under/over exposure. My use of Portra 400 is less, but that too has shown minimal colour shifts under similar conditions. Talk of 5 to 7 stops latitude may be overstating things, but both are as good as medium-fast film ever achieved in that respect. Personally, I shoot them at box speed as a starting point.

This might help:
http://www.twinlenslife.com/2010/12/its-our-favorite-time-of-light-new.html

 

[skysh4rk]

I shoot Fuji Pro 400H in old folding cameras with a limited range of shutter speeds and aperture settings, and those are not always reliable. It has proved to have considerable latitude to under/over exposure. My use of Portra 400 is less, but that too has shown minimal colour shifts under similar conditions. Talk of 5 to 7 stops latitude may be overstating things, but both are as good as medium-fast film ever achieved in that respect. Personally, I shoot them at box speed as a starting point.

This might help:
http://www.twinlenslife.com/2010/12/its-our-favorite-time-of-light-new.html

Yep, I agree that both have loads of latitude for overexposure, although Portra tends to go a bit yellower if overexposed more than a stop, so I will usually opt for 400H if I know there'll be lots of light. If I know that light will be at a premium, then I prefer to use Portra 400, which seems to handle box speed and underexposure better.

I shoot them at box speed as a starting point.

I think I alluded to this earlier, but my lab says nothing when I shoot Portra 400 at or around box speed (+1/3 of a stop), but will comment that frames from rolls of 400H shot at box speed could have benefitted from a bit more exposure. Consequently, I do think that 400H really needs to be overexposed at least a stop to match the shadow detail obtainable with Portra 400 at box speed. I think that the article you've linked to suggests such as well.