Colour film for using indoors without flash?

sparty

sparty

Suspended / Banned
Messages
204
Name
Steve Davies
Edit My Images
Yes
I love the variety of b&w films enabling handheld shots indoors, in low light or at night without using flash. I usually use Ilford Delta 3200 and TMAX P3200 (or push HP5 to 800).

What, if any, colour film is suitable for similar conditions? Can you push colour film like you can with b&w?
I can only home dev b&w at the moment but I should be getting the 'doings' to dev colour within the next month or so.

Btw, I use 35mm and 120.
 
Last edited:
Portra 400 (and presumably 800) is pushable by several stops, there are countless examples on the interwebs if you are interested. Other older emulsions probably can be pushed at least two stops like most colour negative, but you start getting problems like colour casts and shifts.
 
Well I've used Fuji 1600 (not sure if it's still sold tho') really likes 800 asa....colours not as saturated as slow film, but if you can't use flash or tripod inside a church etc, it's either this type of film or an expensive digital camera with IS and made for high ISO.
 
Thanks for the info! My Nikon D3100 is good for hand held shots in low light but I love using film too. Film has a different 'atmosphere' to it :)
 
sparty said:
Thanks for the info! My Nikon D3100 is good for hand held shots in low light but I love using film too. Film has a different 'atmosphere' to it :)
Click to expand...

Well I've only got a Sony P92 and that's playing up :lol:, but Kodak could have started R&D for a new 32,000 asa film but it never got off the engineers/chemists suggested proposal form. :(
 
Hopefully not teaching my grandmother to suck eggs, but you'll need a blue filter for colour balance under tungsten light as Portra is a daylight film only to the best of my knowledge.

...and that will probably add something like 1/3 or 1/2 stop to your exposure times.

Unless you fix it in printing/digital PP.
 
Last edited:
Musicman said:
Hopefully not teaching my grandmother to suck eggs, but you'll need a blue filter for colour balance under tungsten light as Portra is a daylight film only to the best of my knowledge.

...and that will probably add something like 1/3 or 1/2 stop to your exposure times.

Unless you fix it in printing/digital PP.
Click to expand...

Many thanks for the info, I'm not into too much PP faffing so... there will be filters!
 
Unfortunately an 80A or 80B filter will reduce the amount of light a bit more than 1/2 a stop, more like 2 stops for an 80A and between 1 stop and 1+2/3rds for an 80B depending on the manufacturer (an 80A is slightly more strongly correcting than an 80B).

Plus we're assuming this is tungsten light? Under fluorescents you'll need a magenta FL-D filter to counteract the more green light, if I remember it absorbs about a stop of light as well. If in mixed lighting, filter for the most dominant light type.
 
I was about to open a thread asking about colour films under artificial light, when this came up. The focus here seems to be on Portra 400; I was wondering what people's opinions were about Superia 400 (or 800), or Kodak GC 400 (both of these 400 ISO films more easily obtainable, at Boots). Also, would Provia 400X be a problem?

I've not used colour correcting filters with colour film before, only UV and/or yellow filters for black and white. I'm interested in large indoor spaces like greenhouses, butterfly farms, acquaria etc, so I guess fluorescent lighting will predominate. So I need this magenta filter, right?
 
ChrisR said:
I've not used colour correcting filters with colour film before, only UV and/or yellow filters for black and white. I'm interested in large indoor spaces like greenhouses, butterfly farms, acquaria etc, so I guess fluorescent lighting will predominate. So I need this magenta filter, right?
Click to expand...

It's been many years indeed since I shot regularly in colour, but back then Hoya used to do FL-D and FL-W filters for using daylight film in fluorescent light. I think they still make them, but I used to use the Fuji HR series of films (back in the 80's) and this was the one I used for these conditions:

http://www.hoyafilter.com/hoya/products/coloredfilters/flday/
 
These days you don't need to use colour correcting filters with negative film as that can be easily corrected during the scanning stage, it was possible to do it with the traditional optical printing method but it took too long for most non-professional labs to do so not many places routinely offered it. You still have to use them with slide film though.

The best film for this is likely Portra 400 exposed at 1600 (at 3200 it goes very grainy from what I've seen) and either processed normally or pushed a couple of stops (either will get good results). You might also want to consider Portra 800 which doesn't have the new Vision3 motion picture technology like the 400 but will liklely be good. Its a shame that Kodak have not upgraded that like they have the 400 and 160.

According to Hoya, 1.33 stops for 80A and 1 stop for 80B

http://photofilter.com/hoya_factor.htm

Still more than I was expecting.


Steve.
Click to expand...

It depends on the filter manufacturer as to how many stops of light are absorbed with higher end ones like Hoya tending to absorb a little less. If it doesn't say the filter factor on the box then either make tests or assume a common factor, its usually better to overexpose.

Sam
 
s162216 said:
These days you don't need to use colour correcting filters with negative film as that can be easily corrected during the scanning stage, it was possible to do it with the traditional optical printing method but it took too long for most non-professional labs to do so not many places routinely offered it. You still have to use them with slide film though.

The best film for this is likely Portra 400 exposed at 1600 (at 3200 it goes very grainy from what I've seen) and either processed normally or pushed a couple of stops (either will get good results). You might also want to consider Portra 800 which doesn't have the new Vision3 motion picture technology like the 400 but will liklely be good. Its a shame that Kodak have not upgraded that like they have the 400 and 160.
Click to expand...

Ah! I've just bought a couple of Hoya fl-day filters off the bay... mind you, they were cheap and I've been pretty unsuccessful in removing colour casts in post so far!

Seems that everyone thinks Portra is the appropriate film, no love for Superia 400 or Kodak GC400!
 
ChrisR said:
Ah! I've just bought a couple of Hoya fl-day filters off the bay... mind you, they were cheap and I've been pretty unsuccessful in removing colour casts in post so far!

Seems that everyone thinks Portra is the appropriate film, no love for Superia 400 or Kodak GC400!
Click to expand...

Because their based much older film technology so the grain and contrast will increase much much more on top of their already reasonably grainy base and more than 1 stop underexposure/push will likely be too much for them. The Amateur Photographer review of Portra 400 stated that the reviewer had seen ISO100 films with more grain and I quite believe him based on both my own and others results.
 
Last edited:
Can't seem to get it in ones, so a 5-pack ordered! Thanks folks...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top