NPS vs. Portra (compared to Provia 100F)

[joshua_i._divack]

I am getting ready for a color landscape workshop and the instructor has suggested bringing a small amount of color neg film "for situations that exceed the latitude of transparency film."

 

<p>

 

I almost always use Provia 100F. The choices for color neg film in 4x5 format are not many. As between NPS 160, Portra 160-NC and Portra 160-VC, what is closest in look to Provia 100F?

 

<p>

 

Is the drum-scanned and lightjet output final print from the neg going to look the same, better or worse than that from the transparency? Am I making a sacrifice at the print stage to gain latitude at the film stage? If the latter is true, then what is the point?

 

<p>

 

Thanks.

[per_volquartz1]

Doubtful that a color neg would look much different as a print if you

compare Lightjet prints made from "perfect" transparencies and color

negs...

 

<p>

 

One way to control transparencies - in situations of high contrast - or

as your instructor states: "for situations that exceed the latitude of

transparency film", would be to pre-expose your film slightly.

(Not so much that it appears as fog.)

Pre-exposure will also work quite well with color neg. film. Here you

do have the advantage than you can print through the "fog" to create

absolute blacks. Of course you can do the same with transparencies

scanned, dodged and burned in photoshop and output on a Lightjet...

[eric_pederson]

Also consider pulling the Provia. Fuji recommends pulling by a full

stop (EI50) and I have seen no color shift in doing this. You might

try pulling by more than a stop and see if you can gain even greater

latitude. You will probably get some color shift, but if you are

scanning anyway...

 

<p>

 

There would be a certain advantage to reducing the number of films

you carry, and if you are pleased with Provia 100F, you should see

if you can make it meet your purposes. My estimate is that it can be

pulled to have as much latitude as normally processed negative film.

Of course, it will never match pulled negative film in capturing a

very long contrast range, so if you are photographing serious dark

and light (e.g. sunlit church interiors), you probably have little

choice except to use negative film. If you are scanning the

negative, I would expect that the scanning settings would have more

to do with approximating the Provia than which film you are

scanning, but I'm emphatically not an expert here.

[armin_seeholzer]

Hi Josh

 

<p>

 

I take the Fuji Astia for getting very contrasty situation under

control and thad works very good for me!

And a partial grey filter helps also to cut the contrast down!

With thad together there are not many situation left where you realy

need a color neg film.

Because my mag which I work for they only accept transparency films!

 

<p>

 

Good luck!

[paul_coppin]

I'm not sure your question got answered - of the films listed, Portra

160 VC will give you the closest look to Provia. Saturation will be

slightly less with the Portra. You might try bracketing the iso rating

of the Portra at 100 and 200, rather than 160, or get the printer to

fiddle with the print. The neg film will give more info to pull from

the scan <em>if</em> the scene brightness range is managed to suit the

latitude. I'm not sure there's an advantage one to the other if the

final output is always digital, assuming that the negative is exposed

to maximize the info in the scene. If you're printing traditionally,

you <em>should</em> be able to produce a better print from the

neg.(some will argue and you're mileage may vary...:)

[joshua_i._divack]

Got it. Thanks.

[steve_hovland]

Consider taking a small flash to open up the shadows- set it 2-3 stops wider than the lens opening.