Experiences with Portra UC...?

I just tried Porta UC and I think I got some mixed results and was

wondering if anyone else noticed the same. I know it is a high

contrast/high saturation film but I shot it on a very bright sunny

day anyway.

 

I got my prints back and I noticed that a lot of the pictures seemed

a little over exposed. The shadow areas were very dark but more than

that the highlights and light areas seemed washed out. Some of this

was due to the fact that there was a range of dark/light areas due

to the sunny conditions but even in other pictures with a more even

range of light I noticed a lot of the lighter areas were very white

and washed out looking.

 

Has anyone had any similar experiences or advice for shooting Portra

UC? Would this film be more suited to lower contrast conditions like

cloudy or overcast days instead of the bright sunny days I shot it?

Printed on which paper ? Optically or digitally ?

I got it and used it because it works well in high contrast situations. My prints are printed on Kodak Royal paper and they are the best I've ever had from any film.

 

Conni

<i>...I know it is a high contrast/high saturation film but I shot it on a very bright sunny day anyway. </i><p>

Wrong. All the Portra's are <u>low contrast</u> which means that they should excel under these conditions. <p>

We hear from people disappointed with Portra all the time and in just about every instance the problem is due to the printing. <p>

All the Portra's need to be printed by someone who knows how to print Portra preferably on Portra paper. This usually means a pro lab. Even though Portra is low contrast that doesn't mean that the paper that it was printed on is and you are gonna be disapointed with mini-labs and Wally Mart.

I shot a bride 3 weeks ago with a free roll of 120 UC Kodak sent me,on a cloudy day with fill flash.I wasnt thrilled.This isnt an acceptable film for wedding or portrait work,IMHO.It is way too contrasty!Maybe in a studio situation,with total light control it may be fine.But out in the trenches it leaves alot to be desired.

I really like Portra UC. It is, however, not a low contrast film as stated above. I would

consider it to be medium contrast--like VC. It probably wouldn't be my film of choice

for a sunny day nor a scene dominated by black and white (like a wedding). I've

found that most people who don't like the film have bad printing. Printed correctly,

the film is lovely.

<p>

I mention Portra 400UC in my film review <a href=" http://photo.nemergut.com/

equipment/film/film.html">here</a>.

<I>We hear from people disappointed with Portra all the time and in just about every instance the problem is due to the printing. </i><P>This be oh so true. Another example of crappy amatuer mini-lab processing and harsh amatuer papers not being held accountable while blaming the film instead. I can't imagine UC having problems on Professional papers like Portra. I'm curious what kind of paper those of you having "contrast problems" with this film are having your images printed on.

1) As mentioned, Portra 400UC will need to be printed by a person or machine who/which knows the difference between studio/professional and consumer films. The local minilab operated by Joe Highschool may not be programmed to handle it.

 

2) As a whole, Portra films may be moderate contrast - but 400UC has MORE contrast than, say, 160NC. There is a relationship between contrast and saturation. If, in film "A", red light creates more cyan dye (i.e. more saturation) than in film "B", then white light (R+G+B) will create more total dye (C+M+Y) (i.e. more density in the highlights = more contrast).

 

I love 400UC - but I do my own scanning and printing. And oddly, now that I think of it, I've generally shot it in soft light (shade/cloudy days) since, if the sun is out, I use slower films to get the better sharpness. I'll have to try some in sunlight to see what happens.