What's your favorite currently available 120 color negative film?

[Roger Cole]

Because it looks so nice! I am doing the same with my 800 NPZ, shooting it at 200 and developing it normal. I only scan, though, so not sure what that does to printing RA-4.

Ok, that makes sense - how does it look? How is it different from Portra 400 shot at 200, or Portra 160 at box speed?

 

[cjbecker]

I've done some testing with portra 400 and I have shot it from 25 to 128000, (had to try).

Without any push processing I will gladly shoot it from 100 to 3200.

Shooting at 6400 I do a one stop push.

Shoot at 200 for the smooth desaturated colors and shoot at 800 for the saturated colors.

 

[Kirks518]

I've done some testing with portra 400 and I have shot it from 25 to 128000, (had to try).

Without any push processing I will gladly shoot it from 100 to 3200.

Shooting at 6400 I do a one stop push.

Shoot at 200 for the smooth desaturated colors and shoot at 800 for the saturated colors.

This may sound like an amateurish question, but I never push or pull.

So what you're saying is that (for example), if you have Portra 400, but needed more light, you'd push that 1 frame (or however many) to 1600, and process it normally? If that's the case, that's good to know.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I just got free Fuji Pro 400H film at Samys Camera today where Fuji had a one day give away. Retirement is great since I now have to time to go to these. I cannot wait to use the film.

 

[Pioneer]

I use Fuji Pro 400 once in awhile. Good film but seems a bit more saturated than Portra.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I use Fuji Pro 400 once in awhile. Good film but seems a bit more saturated than Portra.

Good then it will become my go to film when I finish off my frozen stock of 135 and 120 Kodak Ultra Film.

 

[MattKing]

This may sound like an amateurish question, but I never push or pull.

So what you're saying is that (for example), if you have Portra 400, but needed more light, you'd push that 1 frame (or however many) to 1600, and process it normally? If that's the case, that's good to know.

"Push" and "Pull" refer only to adjustments to development, not adjustments to exposure.

"underexpose" and "overexpose" are the clearest terms when it comes to exposure: i.e. "I didn't have enough light for the Portra 400, so I intentionally underexposed by one step, and trusted to the film's latitude to give me good results."

Another way of saying that is: "I didn't have enough light, so I intentionally set my meter to 800 for the Portra 400, and trusted to the film's latitude to give me good results."

 

[RattyMouse]

I just got free Fuji Pro 400H film at Samys Camera today where Fuji had a one day give away. Retirement is great since I now have to time to go to these. I cannot wait to use the film.

How many rolls were you able to get? Perhaps Fuji and others should do more of this to stimulate people's understanding/shooting of film. Seems like a great idea.

I just bought 20 rolls of 400H yesterday. It is an absolutely fantastic film. Gorgeous color, beyond compare.

 

[TheToadMen]

I use a lot of Fomapan 100 B&W negative film and develop it with homebrew Caffenol-C-M. I really like it and it is cheap.

Bert from Holland
http://thetoadmen.blogspot.nl

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Ok, that makes sense - how does it look? How is it different from Portra 400 shot at 200, or Portra 160 at box speed?

To my eyes it provides better grain, the colors become a little bit richer in that they are less broken up by the grain. The pictures look a little bit less sharp, I think we actually lose a bit of resolution this way, but for close-ups that may be preferable sometimes. No empty shadows either. T
hey do become a bit harder to scan, since they are denser. But I've found ways of working with them digitally so that it works out well.
I have a color head for one of my enlargers, but sadly don't have the time or money to set up color printing at this time. Some day I will.

 

[Roger Cole]

Thanks, I may have to try that. Color heads are over rated. Definitely in the "nice to have but far from necessary" category for color printing. I printed a lot of color both neg/pos and pos/pos in the 80s and 90s and have never owned one. But I relate to not setting up the rest. Until I can get the basement plumbing in and a darkroom with real ventilation I'm waiting on getting back into color printing (also on having the time again )

 

[Sirius Glass]

Thanks, I may have to try that. Color heads are over rated. Definitely in the "nice to have but far from necessary" category for color printing. I printed a lot of color both neg/pos and pos/pos in the 80s and 90s and have never owned one. But I relate to not setting up the rest. Until I can get the basement plumbing in and a darkroom with real ventilation I'm waiting on getting back into color printing (also on having the time again )

I bought an enlarger with a color head to make black & white prints. Since the filters on contiguous on a color head, I am a happy camper and I can make minor changes to contrast easily. Now I am additionally getting back into color and I will not have to buy a second enlarger.

 

[Roger Cole]

Also for B&W - handy but not essential. CP filters in a filter drawer work just fine for printing color though you do lose the dust and scratch suppression of the diffusion source.


Sent from my iPhone via Tapatalk using 100% recycled electrons. Because I care.