That came quietly, New Kodak Film!

braxus · Nov 10, 2006

Shooting 160VC at 100 sounds a lot like 100UC. 100UC Im told is closer to 160 in speed. What would happen if one shot a roll of 100UC at 160- would the colors or contrast be more muted like VC film? Another thought is would 160VC look a lot like UC in terms of color and grain? This gives me something to try out. I would like 100UC if the contrast was less (maybe overexpose and pull 1 stop developing to help?) Or maybe just underexposing it would control contrast more? Or I could just shoot 160VC at 160.

Photo Engineer · Nov 10, 2006

I don't usually underexpose, but I posted examples of VC from 50 - 400 (I think that is the range) on PN. It was related to James Dainis' post on armchair photographers.

I don't recommend underexposure, just overexposure.

PE

braxus · Nov 10, 2006

I'd like to see those samples from that PN post, but looking up both your name and James didn't seem to produce the post in question. Let me know what its under.

Photo Engineer · Nov 10, 2006

Go here: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=008mLp

for a complete underexpose and overexpose series of 160 VC. These negatives were scanned and posted and then were printed at the appropriate intervals on proof sheets, scanned and posted. It shows the HUGE latitude of negaive films and Portra 160 VC in particular.

I did this with 400 and 800 as well.

PE

braxus · Nov 10, 2006

Thanks Ron.

sbelyaev · Nov 12, 2006

It looks like Portra films have the widest latitude among all available films.
You may want to check this link. It is in russian, but it should be easy to figure out the table. These independent tests were performed at the research center of the russian society of photographers. I feel that they are objective.

http://filmscan.ru/articles/article07.html

Helen B · Nov 12, 2006

Sbelyaev,

That's an interesting table. Thanks for the link.

The second row looks like the dynamic range - is that correct? Portra 160NC gets a rating of ten stops, but Fuji Pro 160S gets a rating of only six stops. That seems odd. I would be interested to know how they determined that value.

Thanks,
Helen

sbelyaev · Nov 12, 2006

1st row - actual sensitivity
2nd row - dynamic range
3rd row - resolution

This tabe was compiled from different issues of a russian photo-magazine (2001-2005). Unfortunately there is no online version of that magazine, so I don't know the details re. the testing procedures.

ajuk · Nov 13, 2006

sbelyaev said:
It looks like Portra films have the widest latitude among all available films.
You may want to check this link. It is in russian, but it should be easy to figure out the table. These independent tests were performed at the research center of the russian society of photographers. I feel that they are objective.

http://filmscan.ru/articles/article07.html

Dead Link Removed

Tom Stanworth · Nov 14, 2006

Photo Engineer said:
This is probably the 2 electron sensitization!

PE

And bipolar ionisation to ensure better spectral collation.

ajuk · Jan 16, 2007

Hmm according to that Russian site Fuji Superia 1600 has more resolution than the 100 version, surely that cant be right?

I have to agree with gnashings, why do Kodak make it so difficult for us, they could of changed the packaging a bit or the name slightly, I am about to order some from 7Dayshop and I have no idea if it the old or new version.

That came quietly, New Kodak Film!

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency