Portrait films for landscapes

[kkog]

Has anyone used low-contrast portrait films for landscapes? You definitely won't get the saturated Velvia look but it should be a softer, more natural rendering (like watercolor?). I'm thinking of using Fuji NPH400 & NPS160 for some time at the beach. If I can't get the Fuji stuff I might try Kodak Portra 160VC. Will I get terribly flat images because of the low contrast and realistic color rendering?

[david.tan]

not really recom for blue sky or green grass shoot, cityscape is just acceptable only, fuji Nph, nps and npz are simply way too low contrast, it makes a landscape looks like cloudy or dark. Beside slide film, i would prefer Reala neg film for landscape :)

[vestax]

I`ve tested kodak 160vc for landscape , like what david said , its so dull here's a sample , no editing , right out from the scanner

[potatoe]

nph 400 was phase out (they said it was renamed, rather) to pro 400H.

i find pro 400H too grainy in all lighting conditions. i yet to see the results of pro 160S as im still shooting my roll with my lca.

velvia is slide films (color positive) isn't it ? the equivalent of potrait film for slide would be the provia series - 100F and 400F. i get excellent results with velvia (100 and 100F) when i cross processed it. provia is a bit ****ty when xpro for me.

if you looking for pro 400H - i bought mine at leo's in ampang park . its about rm13+ per roll.

desmond of YL camera service is selling velvia 50 and velvia 100 - rm15.50 (rolled from bulk 100 feet) - i bought and tested a roll, its ok.

at e6, pudu plaza - the have a better range of fuji films (color and b&w) - i bought my pro 160S (they have 120mm in stock) and they stock provia and velvia. They also sell provia and velvia in bulk roll (they offer to roll for you too). provia is about rm200+ and velvia is about rm300+.

more about fuji films : http://home.fujifilm.com/products/professionalfilms/lineup.html

[PhotoNut]

potatoe, what speed did you shoot the NPH? I found it grainy the first time I used it but it is fine after being advised to over-exposed it.

[potatoe]

i shot at rated speed - iso 400.

what you mean if you shoot at a value above the rated speed, 800 (?) - results would be less grainy ?

[vestax]

what he meant was pulling it by half a stop or 1 stop so that it will be less grainy and more saturated ?

[kkog]

More likely exposing NPH 400 (Pro400H) at ISO 320. Or even ISO 160? I read that with low-contrast film, you can capture more details without blowing out highlights. You can then scan and increase the saturation later without losing detail compared to using highly saturated film. I've seen landscapes on Portra 160VC and I like them; there's a beautiful smoothness and softness, quite the opposite to the punchy vivid colours of Velvia.

[vestax]

yeah i`ve seen some good looking landscape taken using 160vc and 160nc in Photosig and in Propass , but when i tried it , it didn't work at all :( , even editing it in PS doesnt help much .

[nksyoon]

Fuji Reala has good colours.

If you're scanning your film, you need to adjust your settings in your scanning software. I usually don't get good colour balance from the scanner's default settings.

[maxby]

I use APX 100 for landscape photos...:096: Now that this film is out of prodn. maybe I should stop shooting landscapes....

[nksyoon]

Some samples on 120 film. First one is 400NC, second is Reala. Both flat-bed scanned with Vuescan.

They're definitely truthful rather than oversaturated.

[nabghani]

I'm thinking of using Fuji NPH400 & NPS160 for some time at the beach.

other than velvia i used these (120 format) for color landscapes for prints ... got a couple of rolls for autumn colors.

[buyid]

Dewd all else fails just use superia. You can always photoshop the low saturation... :D

[vestax]

hehe i bought 5 rolls of reala and 2 rolls of fuji 400H just now , so see how it goes in the up coming Colors of Thaipusam

[kkog]

>> Dewd all else fails just use superia.

That's precisely the reason I'm using NPH :) Superia's colours are punchy but a bit strange. And Photoshop can't cure all things. If there's no detail in the neg, there's nothing to adjust. Looking at photo.net's film page http://www.photo.net/photo/film there are some nice shots on NPH and Portra.

On the other hand, if the light is flat, low-contrast films can look disastrous ;)

[Bertrano]

Theres a wasabi in my picture:

Kodak ProImage 100. kkog, you were there when this pic was taken :D

[nksyoon]

Another sample - Kodak 400UC with Hasselblad Xpan

http://static.flickr.com/32/99753771_9b5031ad9a_o.jpg

[yoong]

remember u asked me whether i had weird colour cast on NPH after scanning with the 8400F?
the answer? yes. very weird. almost blue-ish colour cast.
gotta learn how to scan this properly if im gonna use this film again.

[david.tan]

remember u asked me whether i had weird colour cast on NPH after scanning with the 8400F?
the answer? yes. very weird. almost blue-ish colour cast.
gotta learn how to scan this properly if im gonna use this film again.

yup ! me hav a same prob as well expecially those sun bright pix, hav to re edit in PS with color balance <_<

[nksyoon]

I'm not sure, but wouldn't it be better to adjust the colour balance in your scanning software before scanning?

[yoong]

and how do i do that? not very sure bout these stuff.

[nksyoon]

Usually there should be some kind of "Advanced" options that can be enabled or selected? This should show you levels or curves controls as well as colour balance controls.

Eg. if your photo looks yellowish, reduce the yellow and increase the blue.

[vestax]

im using a canon pixma mp800 and i can't access the color balance & curve menu , but it doesnt make much difference as we can adjust it in photoshop .

[nksyoon]

Does anyone know if there's any difference between adjusting colour balance in the scanner software vs in photoshop?

Just by intuition, I assume getting it as close as possible before scanning would be better?

[vestax]

Does anyone know if there's any difference between adjusting colour balance in the scanner software vs in photoshop?

Just by intuition, I assume getting it as close as possible before scanning would be better?

I get what you're trying to say , but how are you going to adjust the colors according the actual color of the subject ?. Unless you have the subject by your side , if not i dont see how can you adjust the scanner or photoshop to get an accurate colors .

[ganjohan]

Does anyone know if there's any difference between adjusting colour balance in the scanner software vs in photoshop?

Just by intuition, I assume getting it as close as possible before scanning would be better?

I'm guessing it's better to adjust before scanning. There are two ways I can adjust the colour balance with my NikonScan program; one way is via changing the analog gain for each channel and the other is via 'colour balance' tab. I think if you change it via the analog gain method, you might be able to get more information out of the negative. But becareful though, don't push the blue channel up too high cause it seems it gets very grainy when the blue channel is bumped up.

[nksyoon]

I get what you're trying to say , but how are you going to adjust the colors according the actual color of the subject ?. Unless you have the subject by your side , if not i dont see how can you adjust the scanner or photoshop to get an accurate colors .

Sometimes the "autoexposure" function gives a good starting point. Same with "autolevels" or "autocolor" in PS. If there is something which you know is pure white or 18% gray or pure black, you can use the eye-dropper tool to set the color balance.

The only other thing you can rely on is your own experience and memory of what the scene looked like. Sometimes there's also personal preference - if it's a shot of people in a bar or restaurant, the "correct" WB is too cold. I prefer making it slightly warmer.

[vestax]

i agree with personal preference , my way of scanning is to turn off all the scanner in house editing like , unsharpmask , levels , grain correction , fade correction , backlite correction and etc etc . cause by turning on all those , the picture really looks funny and not natural . after scanning the pictures , i`ll have them edited in PS , like usm , levels and auto color and it looks better then those in house scanner editing , its personal preference :) .