Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/02/23

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Re: Re: Portra
From: Jim Brick <jim@brick.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 21:35:36 -0800
References: <B6BBFE18.118C%douglas@dysmedia.com> <026901c09dc3$8e935e20$830a0a0a@phoenixdb.co.uk>

Last November I shot a job using Portra 160 NC. A jazz band (Jazz Access)
for the cover of their new CD. I used my Dynalite studio strobe set-up, a
Hasselblad, 40mm CFE, and Portra 160 NC 220. Two rolls, 48 shots. I made
contact sheets. They picked two poses. I had the two scanned onto a Kodak
Pro CD from which the graphic artist laid out the CD cover and produced the
digital file that went on to make the CD covers. Other than the type, the
photograph was the whole cover.

The Portra 160 NC was awesome. You could not have asked for anything
better. They wore black. I overexposed it a half stop and processed it
normally. No blocked highlights, full detail in the black clothes. Perfect.
They were r-e-a-l-l-y happy. So was I.

Maybe I told this story before???

Old age brain fade!

Jim

NO OLD FARTS




At 08:41 PM 2/23/01 -0600, onetreehillclw wrote:
>I work at a photo lab and can tell you printing Portra films can be
>a hassle sometimes. Even if the machine has channels set up for it.
>The problem I think is the paper. I use new Kodak Royal VIII which
>is horrible compared to the old Royal VII. Most color films print
>great but when it comes to Portra, I have to make many adjustments.
>Kodak should learn some things from Fuji and quit making their films
>worse. To me Fuji 160, NPH 400, and NHG 800 are best for skin tones. My
>opinion anyway.
>
>Chris Williams

Replies: Reply from Randy Holst <mistervolvo@home.com> (Re: [Leica] Re: Re: Portra)
In reply to: Message from Douglas Cooper <douglas@dysmedia.com> ([Leica] Re: Portra)
Message from "Simon Lamb" <simon@sclamb.com> (Re: [Leica] Re: Portra)