Portrait film ISO400 and ISO800

[fredus]

Hi there,

 

I shoot essentially portrait. I really like Fuji Reala 100 when it's

sunny. But I need a ISO400 for some evening portrait and ISO800

during the night (low light) ... What would you recommend for me ?? I

like vibrant color, nice skin tones, low grain ... The usual :-)

 

Thanks !

 

Fred

[fredus]

I'm headed toward fuji NPH400 (rated at 320) and NPZ 800 ... I might also try Fuji NPC 160 ...

 

Are these good choices ??

 

Fred

[fredus]

Well I'm receiving some advice for Portra 800, Kodak 400UC and Portra 160NC ... Are they any difference between fuji and Kodak ??

 

Fred

[bojan_steinb_cher]

I wouldn't recomend Fuji NPC or Kodak Portra 400 UC for portraits. Try NPS or Portra NC instead.

 

The new NPH can be shot at 400 and it gives great results to me.

[jim_interlicchio1]

I personally like the Porta 400VC my main all purpose print film.

I was recently blown away by the color and detail in shots I took at the Bronx Zoo with NPZ (sorry I don't have a scanner, or I'd post)

That's my two cents...

[jonathan_wang]

I'm an admitted Fuji fanboy, but NPH and NPZ have always performed well for me.

[aguilabrava]

All Fujicolor Pro films in my opinion, are better performers than Kodak's. The one I use most of the times is Fujicolor NPS 160, exposed at EI 125, now, I used Fujicolor NPZ 800 recently, exposed at EI 640, and all I can say is that this film is really amazing, very sharp, the finest grain I've ever seen in a film this speed, very nice colors and specially very natural skin tones, I highly recommend you Fujicolor NPZ 800, I personally think that there is nothing else like this film.

[fredus]

Antonio, you say that you exposed NPZ 800 at 640 ... But do you tell anything to the lab or they develop it at the suggested ISO (800) ?

 

Fred

[emaxxman]

You don't tell your lab anything. You're rating the film at a lower ISO in order to slighty "overexpose" it to get better shadow detail.

 

I love NPZ. However, I'm not sure if I would use it for portraits. The reason being that, for me, portraits mean enlargements. Therefore, the grain, even though it's really fine grained for 800 ISO film, is still noticeable in even 5x7's.

 

For low light portraits, I would stick with NPH 400 rated at 320, flash, a slow shutter speed, and tripod. Only if my subject wasn't able to sit still (i.e. children) or I had to handhold would I use 800 speed film for portraits.

 

Another problem with NPZ is that it's a little contrasty. Using it in lowlight would also compound the problem unless that is the look you are looking for. I think NPH with your flash on slow sync would do a really great job balancing the ambient light and minimize the flash look.

 

Personally, I've gotten great exposures with Reala handheld and bounced flash. They definitely weren't quick shots. I had to brace myself and practice perfect handholding technique, held my breath, and slowly pressed the shutter button. In the end, I had really nice and sharp 8x10's.

[dan_andrews]

NPH has always done well for me. I shot it at 400 and at 320, and found the greater saturation at 320 is needed outdoors in cloudy conditions. (Ironic--just when you could use a little extra speed, the film demands a bit more exposure to get optimum colors!)

 

NPZ was a bust, in my opinion, because it tends to get grainy even when properly exposed. I shot it at 640, 800, in all types of light, and found that it just does not offer results that compare to Fuji's other portrait films. It really is their weakest professional emulsion, in my opinion.

 

I've only played a bit with Kodak films and don't really have a feel for them, EXCEPT for their 800-speed film (again, I had problems with grain like Fuji NPZ).

[scott_eaton]

With Fuji processing NPH and NPZ are your choices. NPH being preferred, but NPZ is remarkable for an 800 speed film.

 

Kodak Portra UC is still my favorite choice on that side of the camp.