ISO VPS 120

[ross_schuler]

I would like to know what iso to shoot vps at for best results. I am

going to shoot a wedding for a friend. I have a sunpak 555 flash on

my 67. I plan to use a 45 and a 105. Does anyone have any suggestions

on what is the best settings on the flash and what problems I may have

[craig_shearman]

Many photographers rate VPS at 125 instead of its official 160. This isn't a huge difference -- one-third of a stop -- but it helps guarantee a gutsier negative (one with more shadow detail).

 

<p>

 

I like to set my strobe for an F-stop of about f-8 to give a reasonable amount of depth of field. Not sure how much range this gives with your flash. I use the larger Sunpak 622 Pro. Since you're shooting 67, there's no reason not to use PMC (ASA 400) and get more depth of field. I routinely use PMC in 6x6 and only go to VPS in 35mm.

 

<p>

 

Craig Shearman/Baltimore

[mark_hubbard]

I've shot various iterations of VPS for about 30 years at 125 with good results; however, I note that for the Fuji equivalent Fuji makes the following recommendations: outside in bright sun, 160; in the studio, 125; outside in overcast (no shadows), 100. It's always a good idea to test for your meter and your equipment, however, before you do a shoot with a new film. Also, your shots will look smoother if you use some sort of softener/diffuser over your flash head.

[dave_jenkins1]

If you like Kodak products, there is absolutely no benefit to be gained by using VPS over PMC in a 6x7 format camera. In fact, you make problems for yourself by using a slow film.

 

<p>

 

I have recently completed a test in my studio in which I photographed my assistant with seven different color negative films under the same lighting setup. I used a Canon EOS A2 with the 85mm f1.8 EF lens, and made all exposures at f8.5 as read with a Minolta flashmeter. I place my model so that her head was in the center of the viewing screen and made several exposures on each roll of film. After processing, I used a 10X Peake loupe to select the sharpest negative in each set, then took the film to a custom lab where the enlarger was set for a 20x30 print size, but only the center of the negative was printed on a sheet of 8x10 paper. I was thus able to evaluate my test at 20X magnification without actually paying for 20x30s.

 

<p>

 

The films tested were Fuji's Reala, NPS-160, NPH-400, Superia 400, and NHG-II-800, and Kodak's VPS and PMC-400. The 160-speed films were rated at 125. Reala was superior to the other films, although one experienced printer had difficulty discerning Reala from NPH. VPS and NPH-400 tied for second. They were about equal in sharpness, with the grain a little finer in VPS but better color in the NPH. The Kodak films displayed a grayness in their skin tones that I don't care for. Kodak's PMC-400 was the least sharp of the films tested, actually less sharp than Fuji's NHG-II at 800 speed. The Fuji 800, by the way, is a revelation. You will simply not believe that a film this fast could be so good. Remember, all these tests were at 20X magnification, the equivalent of a 20x30 print from a 35mm negative.

 

<p>

 

The Fuji NPS-160 was the big loser in this test -- there's really no reason to use it. The grain is no better than NPH400, and it's actually less sharp than NPH. Fuji did photographers a real disservice when they discontinued Reala in 120 & 220 sizes and tried to ram an inferior film like NPS down our throats. I quit using Kodak products because of tactics like that. As for Fuji Superia 400, an amateur film,it's almost, but not quite as good as NPH. I will certainly use a lot of it for family snapshots with the confidence that it will make an easy 16x20 from 35mm, and a pretty good 20x30 if I should ever want one.

 

<p>

 

Getting back to the original proposition -- If you want to use Kodak, then use PMC-400. You will not likely be able to see the difference between it and VPS on a 20x24 print from a 6x7 negative. If you want to make a real improvement, load up with Fuji NPH-400.

[jim_chow]

Actually, Fuji still does make Reala Ace in 120/220. I can buy it just

about anywhere in Japan, even at the local grocery/dept. store. They

don't sell NPH-400 here, though. There's only Reala Ace, Super G 100/400,

NS-160 ("short speed"), NL-160 ("long speed"), and NC-160 ("commercial").

I haven't used any of the 160 speed films, nor do I know how it differs

from NPS sold in the US.

[dave_jenkins]

James Chow is lucky if Reala 120/220 is readily available where he is. There is still some available in the US, but it is shortdated at this point and no more is being imported. Fuji is really missing the boat on this one.

[danny ouellette]

While visiting the states last month, I ran into the situation of not being able to by Reala 120 as well! It really surprised me, as it is readily available in Canada. In fact, a lot of places here in Toronto are actually PUSHING the film quite heavily!

 

<p>

 

I've been using this film for over a year now, and I've been quite happy with the results, both from the 35mm and 120 size.

 

<p>

 

So, for you Americans who like to use Reala, you might consider trying a few film places up here in Canada. I'm sure that it can be shipped for a fairly reasonable cost.

 

<p>

 

Later,

Danny