Portra VC vs NC-how much is enough?

[mike_lyons]

Hi to all.

I'm looking for a colour neg film for landscapes with good colour

saturation. I understand that the VC should do better here as opposed

to the NC. However, Australia (at least in my neck of the woods)

tends to have about a billion stops of contrast in the open sun.

My question is this- how much more constast does VC have inherently

over NC? I am a darkroom rather than digital worker so at this stage

the scanning and Photoshop solutions are irrelevant.

Regards-Mike

[don_wallace1]

Mike,

 

The old joke is that NC stands for "no colour". Although I prefer VC, NC is not that bad. However, I suggest that you go with the VC. It is not as "vivid" as the literature suggests and certainly not as saturated as some reversal films such as Velvia or E100VS. If you have a roll film back, try a roll of each, or even 35mm. Get back to us and let us know what you found out.

 

Don Wallace

[aaron_van_de_sande]

I have had good results using vc with flat lighting and nc with hard lighting for portraits.

[rich815]

I'd now recommend UC over either VC or NC for what you are talking about.

[rich815]

Sorry, my mistake. I see on the Kodak site that 400UC does not come in sheets.

[julian_thomas]

Mike ,

I'min Barcelona and have the same contrast problem. I use Fuji 160 and see no reason to change

 

Julian

[geoffrey_james]

Doesn't it all come down to taste ? I prefer the NC, because I think it is a little

subtler. The best colour photographs, IMO, are those that most closely

resemble monochrome, rather than the tops of old fashioned chocolate

boxes. The last of the Dusseldorf group to emerge, Elga Esser (sp) has done

a very beautiful, if slightly precious, book on the cliffs at Etretat in

Normandymin which the colours are leached out and the sky a pinkish brown.

It looks great -- and it is his look.

[leonard_evens]

You may not be interested in my experience because I scan. But I've tried both N C and VC and I don't see any signficant difference between the two as far as scans are concerned. Since Vuescan allows me to estimate densities as well as telling me the RGB values, I can do the equivalent of comparing densitometer readings for the two films. VC may produce a slightly higher density range at slightly higher constrast, but it doesn't come at all close to what I see with reversal film.

[elliot_n]

NC and VC are very similar, with the latter being slightly more colourful and maybe a

little bit more contrasty.

 

For contrast control experiment with the different grades of Kodak Endura paper (i.e.

Portra, Supra, and Ultra).

[wayne_crider4]

I've used both in the smaller formats inside and out and prefer NC slightly

overexposed to boost saturation: I don't really see a problem with contrast per

se'. Every VC pic that I got back from no matter who, looked muddy and I use

4 diffferent pro labs for color. I know there's plenty of people who like it, but I'm

just wondering if it likes overcast and lower light levels. From what I remember

alot of my pics with it were in the bright sun. As concerns the NC, I do find that

I prefer it on Fuji paper, or maybe it's just the lab I normally use.