After receiving a batch of rather greyish skin tones from a roll of Kodak Portra 160 VC developed by my normal, high-quality lab, I'm reevaluating whether I want to shoot candid portraits (typically the only kind I shoot) with Portra, Fuji NPS, or Fuji Reala. Although Reala is not typically regarded as a portrait film, it gives a nice, warm cast to skin tones. I'll post similar images taken with both Portra and Reala later for a comparison. This photo was taken of my cousin's 2-year-old daughter. I loved Portra's results in this instance. She's adorable and every budding photog's dream, a complete ham for the camera.

Canon AE-1, 135mm prime, about f/2, Kodak Portra 160 NC

I find children so much easier and fun to photograph, because they haven't yet learned to "distrust" the camera. So many adults fear you're not going to take a good picture of them that they freeze up, get stiff, appear frightened or reticent . . . any hints on loosening up the post-12-year old crowd to get natural, relaxed portraits?

-- Matthew Keller (matt_keller@hotmail.com), February 05, 2000

Answers

Sorry -- didn't actually look that big when I went to post it. Didn't mean for it to be a billboard.

-- Matthew Keller (matt_keller@hotmail.com), February 05, 2000.

I think as long as they fit on a 15" screen they're probably not too big. Maybe slow loading during busy times, but...

As for the stiff bunch, be yourself and get your sitters involved. I've often found when I'm in a quiet mood my shoots go worse. I've also found it is good, if you have the opportunity, to keep the first sitting as nothing more than a 'getting used to each other' sitting, with any good results a simple bonus. I almost always do much, much better the second time around...which is kind of frightening from a professional point of view...

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), February 05, 2000.

Regarding film: It seems that most portrait-people prefers Fuji NPH or the like (Portra NC/VC etc.), but I am really confused with all these films, e.g., NPH (400), HNGII (800), NPS(?). Are these so- called Professional films? And if so, what are the equivalent consumer films?

I am looking forward to see Matthew Kellers comparisons between the Kodak Portra and Fuji Reala protrait films. Any chance to include NPH in the test?

Does anybody know how these different film perform on "standard" paper and Kodak Royal paper? Should I have my lab to print e.g. the NPH negatives on special Fuji paper for optimal result? Will it matter?

Kindly, Martin

-- Martin Chr. Hansen, Denmark (immch@pop.dtu.dk), February 06, 2000.

Martin,

There are no "consumer equivalents" to these films. All of the pro portrait films [e.g. Fuji NPS (their 160 speed) and NPH (their 400 speed) as well as the entire Kodak Portra line] are lower contrast films that have generally been tweaked to give pleasing skin tones (a gross oversimplification, but oh well). Compared to consumer films, they are generally less saturated (the Portra VC pair being the noted exception here), and the lower contrast means more subtle gradation into highlights, shadows, etc.

IMO, these films proof on Kodak Royal just fine; the local lab I use works with Royal exclusively for color work and I've been more than plesed with the outcome. The caveat here, of course, is that the same combo in the hands of the wrong lab can look hideous! I used to use a close chain lab for proofing but got tired of having my low saturation films printed with so much color dialed in that colors threatened to bleed off the paper!

Assuming that it's appropriate protocol for this new forum, I'd suggest that you browse the "film" section of the photo.net Q&A archives; there have been some incredibly thorough discussions of these films over the past year or so over there, with lots of detailed info from Scott Eaton, the "resident" lab, film and paper expert.

-- Jerry Trapp (jtrapp@kcnet.com), February 06, 2000.