In my testing I've found the exact opposite of this claim to be true: that Portra 400 is slightly lower contrast and has more dynamic range than Portra 160.Portra 160 has a wider range than Porta 400, but is also intentionally softer.
In my testing I've found the exact opposite of this claim to be true: that Portra 400 is slightly lower contrast and has more dynamic range than Portra 160.
Ha ha! Yeah, I knowA brave person, if I may say so
In my testing I've found the exact opposite of this claim to be true: that Portra 400 is slightly lower contrast and has more dynamic range than Portra 160.
Vision3 line.
I've exposed 500T from 25 all the way to 3200 in 35mm. I've yet to find a way to blow the highlights with the stuff. It's bullet proof. Same for 50D and 250D in their own way. The whole Kodak cine film line is some amazing film.
250D
50D
500T
When developed as a negative, yes. When cross-processed as a positive you get the opposite effect -- high contrast and saturation.
Vision3 500T
View attachment 309263
What color negative film has the best dynamic range and exposure latitude ?
Wow! I have a roll of Eastman 500T...I'll have to check it out.
Are you developing C-41 or ECN?
Whoa.........how do you process as a positive? I mean, sure, I get the hypothetical. But not the real world.
That strip is 500T with 1-2 stops overexposure seeming to give the best slides / reversal results.
E6 times & temps: remove remjet, D-19 1st developer, stop bath & re-expose to room light, ECP-2 2nd/color developer, bleach & fix.
The presence of an orange mask in the film precludes the 'more perfect' color fidelity you'd see from ektachrome/provia but the extra blue response from shooting unfiltered in daylight seems to offset that at least a little. I've attempted this processing regime exactly one time so YMMV. Dynamic range does seem to suffer with this process versus intended use as a negative but that's what you'd expect from a slide film.
That strip is 500T with 1-2 stops overexposure seeming to give the best slides / reversal results.
E6 times & temps: remove remjet, D-19 1st developer, stop bath & re-expose to room light, ECP-2 2nd/color developer, bleach & fix.
The presence of an orange mask in the film precludes the 'more perfect' color fidelity you'd see from ektachrome/provia but the extra blue response from shooting unfiltered in daylight seems to offset that at least a little. I've attempted this processing regime exactly one time so YMMV. Dynamic range does seem to suffer with this process versus intended use as a negative but that's what you'd expect from a slide film.
Wow! Gotta hand it to you. Too bad there's that mask.
You both fail to understand the purpose of the orange mask. The orange response is somewhat poor so the orange was added in and then not fully deleted. That is what give the color negative film the good and complete color match. Without the orange mask the results would not be acceptable to anyone. Armchair Sunday Afternoon Quarterbacking is no replacement for true R&D work in a film company's laboratories.
It's my understanding that the mask is a way to reduce contrast to enable exposures that are not critical.
You both fail to understand the purpose of the orange mask. The orange response is somewhat poor so the orange was added in and then not fully deleted. That is what give the color negative film the good and complete color match. Without the orange mask the results would not be acceptable to anyone. Armchair Sunday Afternoon Quarterbacking is no replacement for true R&D work in a film company's laboratories.
Not correct, I'm afraid.
The colour response of the various dyes and colour couplers in negative film inherently have some deficiencies that cannot be engineered out. The mask provides a proportional compensating factor for those deficiencies which responds exactly to the image itself - the mask and its compensating factor varies with the colours in the negative. Then, when it is time to print, the effect of the mask can be reversed by simply filtering the result. The RA-4 paper or EF-P cine print projection film has that filtration built right in (along with inversion of the resulting colours).
Negative alone: - some colours are deficient, and colours are inverted.
Negative + mask: - deficient colours are compensated for, but overall single colour cast added, and colours are inverted.
Negative + mask + RA-4 paper/projection print film: - deficient colours are compensated for, the mask colour is filtered out and the the colours are inverted.
Voila, beautiful, natural colours!
Discovery and implementation of the technology behind the orange mask was revolutionary, and is the reason that negative + positive colour systems have a better chance to achieve colour accuracy than direct positive or positive + positive systems.
Not correct, I'm afraid.
The colour response of the various dyes and colour couplers in negative film inherently have some deficiencies that cannot be engineered out. The mask provides a proportional compensating factor for those deficiencies which responds exactly to the image itself - the mask and its compensating factor varies with the colours in the negative. Then, when it is time to print, the effect of the mask can be reversed by simply filtering the result. The RA-4 paper or EF-P cine print projection film has that filtration built right in (along with inversion of the resulting colours).
Negative alone: - some colours are deficient, and colours are inverted.
Negative + mask: - deficient colours are compensated for, but overall single colour cast added, and colours are inverted.
Negative + mask + RA-4 paper/projection print film: - deficient colours are compensated for, the mask colour is filtered out and the the colours are inverted.
Voila, beautiful, natural colours!
Discovery and implementation of the technology behind the orange mask was revolutionary, and is the reason that negative + positive colour systems have a better chance to achieve colour accuracy than direct positive or positive + positive systems.
That is the best explanation I have hears in a long time and it is easily understood.
It should be kept as a reference for future use.
Not correct, I'm afraid.
The colour response of the various dyes and colour couplers in negative film inherently have some deficiencies that cannot be engineered out. The mask provides a proportional compensating factor for those deficiencies which responds exactly to the image itself - the mask and its compensating factor varies with the colours in the negative. Then, when it is time to print, the effect of the mask can be reversed by simply filtering the result. The RA-4 paper or EF-P cine print projection film has that filtration built right in (along with inversion of the resulting colours).
Negative alone: - some colours are deficient, and colours are inverted.
Negative + mask: - deficient colours are compensated for, but overall single colour cast added, and colours are inverted.
Negative + mask + RA-4 paper/projection print film: - deficient colours are compensated for, the mask colour is filtered out and the the colours are inverted.
Voila, beautiful, natural colours!
Discovery and implementation of the technology behind the orange mask was revolutionary, and is the reason that negative + positive colour systems have a better chance to achieve colour accuracy than direct positive or positive + positive systems.
The printing paper itself has a blue coating which offsets the orange mask density. The extra orangeness does not vary with image colors or density. It's consistent overall, even in the margins, but might vary a little from one specific film type to another. Just look at the ends of a spool of developed 120 color neg film, or expose a frame with the lenscap on (no image).
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?