So I've got some outdated (2001) 120 film. No box. Foil wrapping is labelled Portra 400 NC. Inside the stickum tape is labelled 160NC, while the paper backing, in smaller letters, is 400NC. Now I believe there are 2 different films - 400 and 160 - referring to the ISO. What do I expose this film at?
Agreed... that is really strange. Twice thid month that I've heard of something like this. Never experianced it in my 20 years though.
NC is Natural Color
VC was Vivid Color...
Actually, I have tried this and at ISO 160 the highlights will tend to get blown out. It would be ok at ISO 320, but ISO 160 is "a bridge too far" for ISO 400 film.
I've got 2 rolls. I already shot one at 160, on the theory that overexposed is better than underexposed (....no....really...... I was going for the ethereal look ....yeah.....that's it.... ).
Actually, I have tried this and at ISO 160 the highlights will tend to get blown out. It would be ok at ISO 320, but ISO 160 is "a bridge too far" for ISO 400 film.
First - if I'm going to shoot colour seriously I'll need to find a proper professional lab. I've not shot any colour negs for a few years. This joint used to do reasonably OK work, but I don't think they've dusted their machine in the last couple of years - a bazillion dust spots on the prints.
Next - the film's definately 400 - it's right there on the rebate. BUT - the roll I shot at 320 is a bit thin, while the one at 160 actually looks much better. The prints don't look overexposed either - no blown highlights. I've uploaded one to the gallery. If I find any more of this stuff in the freezer I probaly will split the difference and shoot at 200.