Rebekah wrote:
Any opinions on Kodak Portra 100UC?
rg2
Doesn't exist anymore. Or rather, Kodak isn't making it anymore.
Portra comes in 160 and 400, NC (natural color) or VC (vivid color).
There's also a Portra 800 for low light. Portra 100UC wasn't the most
popular of the Portra
I saw some Ebay, and I didn't know what it was, so I was just curious
if it was any good. :o) thanks mucho
rg2
On 9/3/07, Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rebekah wrote:
Any opinions on Kodak Portra 100UC?
rg2
Doesn't exist anymore. Or rather, Kodak isn't making it
Film is dead...
Rebekah wrote:
Any opinions on Kodak Portra 100UC?
rg2
--
Remember, it’s pillage then burn.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Probably expired as well then...
Rebekah wrote:
I saw some Ebay, and I didn't know what it was, so I was just curious
if it was any good. :o) thanks mucho
rg2
On 9/3/07, Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rebekah wrote:
Any opinions on Kodak Portra 100UC?
rg2
it's not expired
rg2
On 9/3/07, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Probably expired as well then...
Rebekah wrote:
I saw some Ebay, and I didn't know what it was, so I was just curious
if it was any good. :o) thanks mucho
rg2
On 9/3/07, Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rebekah wrote:
I saw some Ebay, and I didn't know what it was, so I was just curious
if it was any good. :o) thanks mucho
Actually, if it's the 100 ISO version of the 400UC I used a couple of
years ago, which didn't strictly speaking have Portra printed on the
box, I'd expect it to be
UC was introduced as a Portra film (to go with NC and VC) and then
quickly spun off into it's own line.
I just picked up some of the 400UC in 120, since I heard UC in 120 is dead.
-Adam
Toralf Lund wrote:
Rebekah wrote:
I saw some Ebay, and I didn't know what it was, so I was just curious
Its nice enough. Bit blueish if printed on colour paper, but printed
on proper BW paper is fine. I prefer the Ilford stuff personally so
have no need for it.
-Original Message-
From: David Mann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 05 March 2003 09:29
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
Hi Dave,
I've used it many times. It, in my opinion, beats XP2 hands down. It is
the finest C-41 BW film out there but it is expensive (at least up here in
Canada). Most people, I think, usually opt for XP2 or T400CN before
spending the extra dough on Portra 400 BW. If you can afford it, it's
I read some nice things about it at photo.net. Do a search. Excellent
tonality.
PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Kodak Portra 400 BW
Its nice enough. Bit blueish if printed on colour paper,
but printed
on proper BW paper is fine. I prefer the Ilford stuff
personally so
have no need for it.
-Original Message-
From: David Mann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 05 March 2003
- Original Message -
From: David Mann
Subject: Kodak Portra 400 BW
Hi all,
This film is now in stock at my local camera shop. Has anyone out there
tried it?
Nice film. Prints well on RA-4 paper and scans nicely.
Fine grain (VERY FINE GRAIN), but not overly sharp, nice tonal
On Monday, May 27, 2002, at 05:48 PM, frank theriault wrote:
Really, the only
thing stopping me from doing this darkroom thing is intertia, and fear
that I'll
screw up some otherwise nice shots (they're so few and far between, I
can't afford
to lose any!) by doing something wrong.
On Tuesday, May 28, 2002, at 04:20 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I'd suggest Agfa's Rodinal with those films.
I also would suggest Rodinal, or Ilford Perceptol (if you don't mind a
powder). I'm a fan of Perceptol with old school (as in, non-T grain)
stuff like APX, Plus-X, FP4 and the like.
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Re: Kodak Portra and T400CN (WAS: Kodak Portra)
Perhaps this has been asked and answered before, and if it
has, I wasn't
paying attention. There may be some need or preference for me
to shoot
some chromogenic BW in a few months and I
On Sunday, May 26, 2002, at 01:04 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I wasn't suggesting using a minilab for printing real BW. If you can't
print the negs yourself, then find a real lab that can do the printing
for you. I'd never suggest a minilab for making a decent BW print.
I know, Shel, I was
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If yer talking C-41, push processing doesn't do anything usefull
anyway.
I was talking to my lab guy the other day about this too. He thinks
the average c-41 emulsion can get a 1/2 stop. After that you just
start getting color crossover and
BigDay Tom wrote:
On a side note, the allure of chromogenic has caught me
...I shot my first roll at a wedding yesterday
The discontinued (but still in the pipeline) TMaxCN is
(IMHO) a marvelous people film. The tonality is very
smooth and grain effect
Perhaps this has been asked and answered before, and if it has, I wasn't
paying attention. There may be some need or preference for me to shoot
some chromogenic BW in a few months and I was wondering if any version
of the stuff has better archival properties than another, and if the
various
On Monday, May 27, 2002, at 11:07 AM, tom wrote:
Unfortunately my lab has slightly elderly machines and they don't even
have the option of pushing...supposedly they're getting a frontier
this year.
Frontier won't let 'em push. As far as I know, no automated mini-lab
style machines can
Hi David.I was just at Accent in Markham dropping
off the weekend film and they have 2-3 bricks
in the fridge.I'm going to pick up some from them
when i pick up my colour proofs Friday.
Thanks for the offer
Dave
Maybe I've been too harsh on T400CN -
FWIW, Dave Brooks, I know that Downtown
I haven't had any trouble getting more stock of T400CN. If the channel
starts drying up, I'll sound the alarm, but for now I wouldn't panic
about it.
-Aaron
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget
Frank,
You can't screw up a nice shot. If you've got the negative, then you
can always make another print, or, if you feel particularly insecure,
the neg can always be taken to a good printer for a final, exhibition
quality print.
And, by processing your own BW, you can have absolute control
I agree with everything you say, Shel, except the last paragraph. I've only used c41
bw
twice. The first time, I bought Ilford because I was out on a walk, ran out of film,
and
the minilab that I went into (first and last time) only had c41 bw. The next time was
when I bought the Portra a
On Sun, 26 May 2002, frank theriault wrote:
I'm wondering if the cast is inevitable from minilabs, but if you get
it printed on BW paper maybe it works? Anyone else out there know
It's possible for minilabs to print the chromogenic stuff on colour paper
so that it looks very close to black
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of CBWaters
I've been told you can have the C41 stuff re-printed on BW
paper and get
good results. I'm not inclined, however, to pay to have my
pictures (such
as they are) printed when I KNOW I'm not
Hi,
I've shot the Kodak 400 C-41 BW( the kind you buy at Target, WalMart, etc.)
and had it printed on BW paper. It looks great. Only problem is I lose the
savings and convenience of C-41 due to the cost of having it printed on
BW paper. I may as well shoot HP5 or TriX Pan(and do) because it
Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, May 26, 2002 6:49 AM
Subject: Re: Kodak Portra?
Hi Cory, Frank ...
Why don't you guys just spent $25.00 or so and buy a developing tank and
a reel or two, get some chemicals, and start processing your own BW -
the real stuff? You
Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, May 26, 2002 6:49 AM
Subject: Re: Kodak Portra?
Hi Cory, Frank ...
Why don't you guys just spent $25.00 or so and buy a developing tank and
a reel or two, get some chemicals, and start processing your own BW -
the real stuff? You
Prints from Save On Drugs (one 5 pack) appear identical in quality to those
I get from Pro Photo Connection (four 5 packs). Black White with no
discernable color cast, YMMV. Color sensitivity seems very flat across the
spectrum, much flatter than most regular BW films. Consider using a green
Sure there is ... you'll get to learn a new skill, have greater control
over your work and the quality of your work, save a little time as
compared to running to the lab, and, once you've got the negatives done,
and have learned to read them, you can then have specific negatives
printed at a
Does this stuff look any better when printed at minilabs
than the films more
easily available (like at Target Wal-Mart)?
I recently took some C-41 bw film to Target (can't remember which
brand) and they couldn't get the tone right. They kept trying and I
ended up with one sepia toned, one
- Original Message -
From: Robert Woerner
Subject: Re: Kodak Portra?
Hi,
I've shot the Kodak 400 C-41 BW( the kind you buy at Target,
WalMart, etc.)
and had it printed on BW paper. It looks great. Only problem
is I lose the
savings and convenience of C-41 due to the cost of having
At 08:25 5/26/2002 -0400, frank theriault wrote:
I've only used C41 bw once (it was Ilford, I can't remember the exact
type), and I hated the blue/purple cast from the minilab. Said I'd never
use the crap again.
Must be XP2, all the others are from Kodak (T400 CN, BW+, Portra 400 BW).
I've
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Amita Guha
Does this stuff look any better when printed at minilabs
than the films more
easily available (like at Target Wal-Mart)?
I recently took some C-41 bw film to Target (can't remember
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of William Robb
It is really dificult to get perfectly neutral results with the
pseudo BW films on colour paper. For 5 bucks a roll, they have
to accept they are not getting custom colour balanced
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of frank theriault
Sent: Sunday, May 26, 2002 8:26 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Kodak Portra?
Hi, Cory,
I'm the same as you. I've only used C41 bw once (it was Ilford, I can't
remember the exact type), and I hated the blue/purple cast from the minilab
- Original Message -
From: Amita Guha
Subject: RE: Kodak Portra?
Does this stuff look any better when printed at minilabs
than the films more
easily available (like at Target Wal-Mart)?
I recently took some C-41 bw film to Target (can't remember
which
brand) and they couldn't
- Original Message -
From: tom
Subject: RE: Kodak Portra?
It is really dificult to get perfectly neutral results with
the
pseudo BW films on colour paper. For 5 bucks a roll, they
have
to accept they are not getting custom colour balanced
prints.
Exactly! What do you people
I am concerned that though the topic is specifically about Portra BW, all
the chatter coming back appears to be mostly about other C41 BW films and
the color casts experienced with them. This is not the same film. I've used
the other films, Kodak Black and White +400 Film for example, and seen
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of William Robb
What I have found is, the less they pay, the higher their
expectaions seem to be. I don't understand it myself. Well,
actually, I do understand it, but my thoughts on the subject are
On Sunday, May 26, 2002, at 11:17 AM, David Chang-Sang wrote:
It does not have
the strange blue/purple cast that Ilford XP2 has.
This is because those particular labs do have a channel for Portra BW
and do not have a channel for XP2. It is not inherently the nature of
the film. Just like
On Sunday, May 26, 2002, at 06:49 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Why don't you guys just spent $25.00 or so and buy a developing tank and
a reel or two, get some chemicals, and start processing your own BW -
the real stuff?
Only problem is, if you're getting minilab prints, and they're coming
I wasn't suggesting using a minilab for printing real BW. If you can't
print the negs yourself, then find a real lab that can do the printing
for you. I'd never suggest a minilab for making a decent BW print.
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
Only problem is, if you're getting minilab prints, and
Developing tank and reel(s) - $25.00
Developer - $3.00
Stop - $5.00?
Fix - $5.00
Photoflo or LFN (Wetting Agent) - $5.00
Clips to hang film to dry - free to $10.00
Dark room for loading film - Free
A pair of scissors - I'm sure you've got a pair somewhere g
Negative sleeves - $5.00
Some of these
Frank Cory et all.I have used some 400CN andthe
replacement the Black and White Select + and
have it printed on colour paper as 'proofs'then
pick the ones i think would look good in BW
and have them print out on the proper
paper.Some times the 'sepia' effect makes a
better picture IMHO
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Re: Kodak Portra?
Heck, when I had a little place back in 1972, I couldn't even
use the
bathroom, but I figured out a way to use an Omega D2V-XL in my
kitchen,
which I could make light tight, and I built a small wet sink
in the room
On 20 Apr 2001, at 21:34, William Robb wrote:
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dkieltyka/Portra400BW.h
tm
Geeze Shel, that Leica lens looks pretty darned good in internet
applications. I hope you aren't planning to sell it.G
Wheatfield Willie
The page and images are actually from
I just want to be clear that the photos made with the new film are
not mine. I just posted the URL so those interested could see some
results the film can produce.
--
Sheldon Belinkoff
CREATURE'S COMFORT
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To
- Original Message -
From: "Creature's Comfort" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Pentax List" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: April 20, 2001 7:55 PM
Subject: Kodak Portra 400 BW Images
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dkieltyka/Portra400BW.h
tm
Geeze Shel, that Leica lens looks pretty darned
Thanks,
I was really anxious to see some comments about this film. I'll give it a
try as soon as it becomes available to the poor side of the world.
Perhaps it's a bit earlier or inappropriate to ask you such question, but
would you consider it capable of substituting a true BW print film?
By
51 matches
Mail list logo
