I realize that questions similar to this one have been asked frequently on the forum, but I need a little help regarding color negative film selection. While I have about decided that Tri-X fills the bill for b&w, I have not shot enough color negative film to form an opinion as to one general-purpose outdoor emulsion for travel, landscapes, architectural, family gatherings, etc. . I have used Kodak's Portra and was pleased with the results. I know that Portra is used professionally for weddings, portraiture, etc., but from the experiences of forum members, how does it compare to other color negative film for the applications I have specified? What version is recommended? I am seeking to simplify by using one film each for b&w, color, and slides. Your advice is always appreciated. Thank you.

-- Max Wall (mtwall@earthlink.net), February 21, 2002

Answers

it's my new most favorite print film, formerly Reala, for the applications you mentioned.

-- chris chen (chrischen@msn.com), February 21, 2002.

Portra's marketing makes the point that it is a PORTRAit film, with emulsion optimized for accurate skin tones. I wouldn't let that stop you from shooting a landscape with it, thought. If it has worked for you and you like it, stick with it.

I generally use Superia because it's cheap, which is an important consideration. Today's brand-name films are workhorses, anyway. Run them gleefully through your camera and don't worry about them.

-- Preston Merchant (merchant@speakeasy.org), February 21, 2002.

Portra 160vc is a film that I have only just discovered and have shot quite a lot of it and from the results so far am going to shoot a lot more. I,ve only used it in 120 and the results are superb, very creamy tones and grainless, for many of the applications you mention I am going away from over saturated films with too much contrast and Portra has a 'feel' that works for me.

-- Gary Yeowell (gary@yeowell.fsnet.co.uk), February 21, 2002.

I haven't yet used it myself (soon to be rectified) but 400VC has had good feedback from users.

-- Tim Franklin (tim_franklin@mac.com), February 21, 2002.

My favoured colour neg film is now Fuji NPH400 - ideal speed for all round use, fine grain and realistic colour reproduction.

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), February 21, 2002.

I am a convert to 160 Porta. I was usually only using Fuji slide film for anything serious, and when I needed print film, I would just use some ISO 400 print film as if it were color Tri-X. After a couple of rolls of the porta, I started to reconsider my expectations. It also didn't hurt that my new lab just does such a good job with the porta.

I like the tonal range of the porta... I can shoot a simple front lit subject, but when going against the light, the slightly lower contrast allows the subject to be viewable in a lighting scenario that would be impossible with some films.

With all of the limitations of a computer, here are a couple of examples of porta 160. The prints look great, but these are only simple scans.

front / side light hard backlight

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), February 21, 2002.

I agree with Giles. I use NPH 400 shot at EI 320 and printed on a Fuji Frontier printer. The results are really wonderful.

-- Steve Rosenblum (stevierose@yahoo.com), February 21, 2002.

I really like the Portra 160NC. The 160VC adds a little punch and extra contrast to the colors which some may find desireable for landscape, however I still prefer NC. Another feature of the 160 (either) is that they have a pretty good latitude -- at least one stop extra to 320 -- if the light gets low.

:-),

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), February 21, 2002.

I shoot mostly people, and second the posters who like Fuji NPH. It avoids those phoney oversaturated colors that plague a lot of color emulsions. For a slower film, Reala is great. I shoot at f/8 with a tripod, and people ask if the 11X14 prints were medium format! Lately, I've also shot quite a bit of Supra 800. It's fast, scans really well, and is cheap (unlike NPZ, which isn't.) I'm really impressed by those Fuji Fronteir prints, too.

-- Phil Stiles (stiles@metrocast.net), February 21, 2002.

I have used all the Portra films, and I am very happy with the results. I am going to try the Portra B&W film next.

I will get flamed for this but "IT'S MADE IN THE U.S.A."!

Regards,

-- Alan Purves (lpurves@mnsi.net), February 22, 2002.

I have standardised on two colour films: Fuji Press 800 for hand-held indoor, low light use and Kodak Supra 100 for everything else. For me, the Supra 100 is very easy to scan and the film is almost grainless(!) The P800 I use mainly because it is (much) cheaper than the NPZ800 or Supra 800 equivalents (even if it is a bit contrastier).

-- Andrew Nemeth (azn@nemeng.com), February 22, 2002.