Kodak Portra

soupdragon

soupdragon

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,644
Name
Tony
Edit My Images
Yes
Anyone here using Kodak Portra, specifically 160.

I'm about to load and hopefully run a roll through my camera.
I did my usual internet search for reviews, samples and opinions and the word varies greatly. That said, there is a bias toward over exposing Portra as I quote others who say "It's light hungry"

Normally I expose film at box speed but some say it should be down rated to 100 from 160.

I guess what I'm asking is, do people here shoot at box speed or is there a reference table somewhere for optimum film speed ratings?
 
It seems to have a huge exposure latitude.
Although there are some highlights blown in the video.
 
Box speed has been fine for me, although all my results are scanned by the lab so I don't know if they are tweaking exposures. Couple of (unprocessed) contact sheets below which don't show overly wrong exposures. 1st manually metered on an RB67, 2nd auto metered on a 645n.

2021-07-01-portra160-rb67.jpg
2021-08-20-portra160-eos30.jpg
 
I often use Portra 400 and have recently used about 6 rolls of expired 160NC (15-18 years old, no storage history) and one roll of expired 160NC fridge stored.

The Portra 400 I run at box speed, but I'm happy to over-expose a little if required to pull up shadow areas.

The 160NC fridge stored I ran at box speed and was happy with the results, with the no storage history film, I used one roll (I have 20 of them!!) as a test and found the best results at ISO80, so have been using it at that.

On the whole Portra has good exposure latitude, my preference is to run wherever possible at box speed and err on the side of over-exposure (as opposed to under exposure)

FYI originally Portra was tagged NC (natural colour) and VC (Vivid Colour), the current non-tagged Portra is somewhere in the middle.
 
Harlequin565 said:
Box speed has been fine for me, although all my results are scanned by the lab so I don't know if they are tweaking exposures. Couple of (unprocessed) contact sheets below which don't show overly wrong exposures. 1st manually metered on an RB67, 2nd auto metered on a 645n.

View attachment 338643
View attachment 338644
Click to expand...
The RB67 shots appear more saturated although that could just be subject matter.
Either way, box speed looks fine and I'm assuming there is shadow detail to be had.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
I often use Portra 400 and have recently used about 6 rolls of expired 160NC (15-18 years old, no storage history) and one roll of expired 160NC fridge stored.

The Portra 400 I run at box speed, but I'm happy to over-expose a little if required to pull up shadow areas.

The 160NC fridge stored I ran at box speed and was happy with the results, with the no storage history film, I used one roll (I have 20 of them!!) as a test and found the best results at ISO80, so have been using it at that.

On the whole Portra has good exposure latitude, my preference is to run wherever possible at box speed and err on the side of over-exposure (as opposed to under exposure)

FYI originally Portra was tagged NC (natural colour) and VC (Vivid Colour), the current non-tagged Portra is somewhere in the middle.
Click to expand...
Certainly glad to hear it has a good shelf life regardless of what Kodak say.
The shadow areas are of most interest to me. I have been shooting exclusively Fuji velvia which is not great in the shadows when properly exposed. Given I scan at home it can be frustrating trying not to blow highlights at the sacrifice of shadow detail.
 
I use both (though not so much recently (been lazy and shooting digital :rolleyes: , must remedy that (y))) but box speed is fine. When metering I tend to use a spot meter and average out the scene for the areas I want well exposed, I don't mind over exposing the highlights a bit but as Ian @Harlequin565 says my negs are lab scanned to TIFFs so I don't know how much correcting they may have done. I find negs hard to assess on a lightbox compared to slides which are easy.

Here are 2 samples from a roll of 160 which were scanned to 65mb TIFFs then I put them through Lightroom and finally PS to resize.


Sharp Tor-43750012 PS Adj.JPG

Yar Tor-43750008 PS Adj.JPG
 
Last edited:
soupdragon said:
Normally I expose film at box speed but some say it should be down rated to 100 from 160.
Click to expand...
It's fairly meaningless to talk about set speed rating without correlating that with the method of gauging exposure, since the two things are interdependent.

In a rough and ready way I've had decent results from Portra (160 & 400) by using box speed and metering the shadows ...

Lab scans tend to be automated and don't always get the best result. I found careful use of a good film scanner better.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
I often use Portra 400 and have recently used about 6 rolls of expired 160NC (15-18 years old, no storage history) and one roll of expired 160NC fridge stored.

The Portra 400 I run at box speed, but I'm happy to over-expose a little if required to pull up shadow areas.

The 160NC fridge stored I ran at box speed and was happy with the results, with the no storage history film, I used one roll (I have 20 of them!!) as a test and found the best results at ISO80, so have been using it at that.

On the whole Portra has good exposure latitude, my preference is to run wherever possible at box speed and err on the side of over-exposure (as opposed to under exposure)

FYI originally Portra was tagged NC (natural colour) and VC (Vivid Colour), the current non-tagged Portra is somewhere in the middle.
Click to expand...
Glad to read this! Just picked up a box of expired Portra 400 220. Didn’t want to ruin a whole role of 220 figuring out I was under or overexposing unnecessarily.

I know there’s a general rule of 1 stop over exposure per decade but my mind can’t fathom how that is the norm for all film. As all film is different. B&W vs Colour Negative vs Colour Positive and then 100 iso Vs 400 vs 800.
 
Last edited:
Jakemico AE-1P said:
Glad to read this! Just picked up a box of expired Portra 400 220. Didn’t want to ruin a whole role of 220 figuring out I was under or overexposing unnecessarily.

I know there’s a general rule of 1 stop over exposure per decade but my mind can’t fathom how that is the norm for all film. As all film is different. B&W vs Colour Negative vs Colour Positive and then 100 iso Vs 400 vs 800.
Click to expand...

Portra is very flexible, you can away with over exposure so don’t be afraid of eating it between 100 and 200
 
I've just finished a roll of 400 in my Bronica SQ-Ai, by habit I normally take 2 shots of each composition one at metered and one a stop over but I am wondering if that is necessary after getting this film back.

Bronica Contact Sheet from Bleak House Portra 400 Border.JPG

In shots 6 and 7 I should not have been so lazy and used a grad for the sky but you live and learn. I have to say though I'm pleased to get 12 useable shots from one film. When I work out the cost they are roughly £3.00 per frame on this flim that's £6.00 per composition. :banghead:

One full image in all it's glory.

005 Bleak House 02-58020005 PS Adj.JPG
 
soupdragon said:
I did my usual internet search for reviews, samples and opinions and the word varies greatly.
Click to expand...
Forgive me for replying to this ancient thread (I'm fairly new here)...

I've found that a lot of film reviews are, for lack of a better word, useless. A few people just don't know what they're talking about, while others use oddball development methods and then complain that the pics look flat, or never learned to evaluate negs and don't understand what their scanner is doing and complain that the film blows out highlights or loses shadow detail. I think some people also see what they expect to see -- they shoot a cheap film and assume it must be worse. But mostly it comes down to personal preference. Someone who loves T-Max 100 probably isn't going to like Fomapan 400, and someone who loves Fomapan 400 probably isn't going to love Kentmere.

So I read film reviews and look at the pics but I also take them with a grain of salt -- I find the best way to evaluate an emulsion is to try it myself and form my own opinion.

(Same with trying alternative speeds (though I tend to be pretty conservative and go with box speed unless I'm pushing). It's true that color print film has a lot of latitude and can handle pertty serious overexposure (Back In The Day, cheap fixed-exposure cams relied on that) but that doesn't mean you need to do that.)

That said, my method has its risks... like you fall in love with a film like Ultrafine XTreme just weeks before a pandemic hits and you can't buy it ever, ever, ever again.

Aaron
 
cardiff_gareth said:
Won't lie - our dog does the same so we bought an outside mailbox and a new front door with no letterbox! Extreme but it works well!!

Back to Portra - Everywhere is like £15 a roll with delivery that I can see at the moment.
Click to expand...
Looking into that solution already!

Yeah. I managed to get a good deal on some 400 through AnalogueWonderland. Think it was £45 for the pack of 5 but with a £10 off voucher through the loyalty scheme.

These were expired 220 rolls which seemed a steal seeing as they’re twice the length. Oh boy… I nearly cried seeing them all over the floor. Not a single useable roll left
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top