hi sam, back when i first developing and scanning my film, i thought if i'm the one who adjusting the color of the negative, what's the point buying more expensive film? I wonder what process you're using reversing negatives, since I'm pretty used to adjust those kodak gold to a more neutral color tone.
Most of the reason for buying more expensive film is grain size, and latitude, especially when talking about black and white. For colour film, you also would be looking for tonality of skin tones most of the time, but it depends largely on the type of photography you're doing. Most of the expensive film was destined for studio work, which means pro photographers, with expensive gear, under controlled conditions. Results on film depend largely on lens resolution first. Each lens has a character that's resulted from a mix of length, number of elements, aperture performance and coatings. Then you have to deal with the conditions under which the film is being developed, and the accuracy of the scan. Overall, as long as there is a clear control over all aspects of taking a photo, be it on film or digital, it will result in the desired results, taking into account all the limitations of the gear you're using, of course. And it should lead to the least amount of post-processing.
I used Gold 200 for years until I tried Fujifilm (can't remember exactly which one), and I found it to be "fresher" in its appearance. I haven't shot much in a while but monochrome has a fascination for me, mainly because that's what I used when I started using a camera as a 12 year old and now in my late 60's I'd like to do it again with the same (now vintage!) camera😁. Love your videos, Sam, keep up the good work👏👏👏👏
SAM!!!! thank you for taking about the GREEN! thats how I felt as well. I enjoy warmer feelings so I've been shooting strictly Kodak Gold for the passed 2 years. 90% of my photos are with gold and the other being black n white ilford HP5 and Ilford XP2. Really enjoy your videos. Keep up the good work!
Portra 160 should be shot between ISO120-ISO80. Exposing for the shadows renders most of the colour tones properly, and it leads to rich highlights as well. Contrast and saturation are the only aspects that would need be worked on after developing, although you can control that through the chemical process to some extent.
It is unfortunate how different the 120mm gold 200 is from the 35mm, and it's been a common complaint for years, I wonder if there is some sort of production difference at the factories that kodak hasn't fixed.
Do you send the pictures to the people that you photograph? I feel like the bikers or the mother of the two boys would love to have them. Please tell me you share them with them. 😊 Love your videos. Such a great vibe!
not to worry Sam, everyone has a " what the??" moment when starting film photography, or a new film, I had a lot of trouble getting a 'roll' off, safe; it took me three rolls [120] 🙂; but Now I get it, as mostly shooting buildings, seascapes, bridges, cars etc. choosing the best film for the genre you shoot is hard, I have shot Acros 100, EkTar 100 and gold 200 so hard to choose which works best. B&W is also a choice, but depends if shape or colour takes your fancy more. Also if unsure about a film, having the right camera helps to, as say a Bronica, or Hasselblad H1/H2 (6x4.5), or a Hasselblad 500 series (6x6) has a magasine, not insert only, like the 645N so you can switch mid roll, so if a scene "wants" portra, B&W aka Ilford HP5+, or other options, like low or high asa, you can switch and do the right film for conditions, also making best use of the film, for the scene presented to you.
I guess we're a lot to relate with your experience. With the "new" Portra the higher ISO they are, the better. Too bad 800 is that expensive now, but it has never disappointed me unlike the 160 whatever the format... But I know a bunch of photographers who make great work with it. 10 years ago I found a bunch of Portra 160 VC/NC that sit in my freezer since. I've only tried one NC and, somehow, the vibe reminded me of 16mm film and I liked it. One friend gave me a 120 version of an expired 160NC that hasn't been stored properly. Strong yellow cast but it was easy to neutralize it. And, so far, it's my best experience with any Portra 160, old or new. I've found a not so expensive expired 160VC in 4x5, don't know how it will turn but 'I'm excited to figure out 🙂
Thanks for sharing :). So some people like grain and sometimes travel shots Gold 200 would be fine. But when you want fine grain film stocks like Portra 160 or Ektar 100 for more pro stuff or if you are like me and like a nice clean image then you have to pay the higher price and get film like this. But Gold 200 has been a great over all every day shooter film and I have had decent luck with it as well.
I just saw the same old biker gang here in Forks, Wa a few days ago. They were traveling through headed South on highway 101. Probably a different chapter but the same jackets anyway.
great video, but one thing, as at 4:20 if you want greens and reds to 'pop' in colour, try Kodak EkTar 100 I have, and shot my local botanical gardens with it, great colour, bright and vibrant, and also for BRIGHT conditions, the 100 means less worries about over-exposing highlights, Glare, etc.
lol.. wait till you figure out that you should carry a color meter and some CC filters with you. NC looks great between 4800-5200k . You need to correct the light coming into the lens then it looks amazing. Same thing goes for chrome! Most non commercial photographers can’t wrap their brains around this. But it’s the best way to handle your film if you like good neutral colors. If you do get filters don’t neglect the magenta and green . Back in the day 3 inch wratten filters on the Mamiya rz67 lens shade was the standard methodology along with a Minolta color meter.
I love portra 160! It’s just too expensive to use as much - i tend to use gold 200 as it’s cheaper and only for sunny days 🎉 if i could I’d use portra 400 all the time - it’s such a versatile film stock 😊
I've shot a lot of Portra 400 and loved it but Gold is special. And portra 160 is lacking the things that make 400 so nice. It isn't airy and pastel it's green and muddy. I just don't like 160. (Favorite film stock is still Ektar)
I couldn’t get through the video because of all the piano music in the background which was loud l, unnecessary, and completely annoying. Especially the first song was Christmas music and it’s early September still. Sorry, just giving you honest feedback.
覺得拍得很棒！影片氛圍也很舒服！
未來如果能有中文字幕就更棒了😂
hi sam, back when i first developing and scanning my film, i thought if i'm the one who adjusting the color of the negative, what's the point buying more expensive film?
I wonder what process you're using reversing negatives, since I'm pretty used to adjust those kodak gold to a more neutral color tone.
I just start to use digital camera to scan my negative, but I used to use EPSON V850, and Negative Lab Pro
Most of the reason for buying more expensive film is grain size, and latitude, especially when talking about black and white. For colour film, you also would be looking for tonality of skin tones most of the time, but it depends largely on the type of photography you're doing. Most of the expensive film was destined for studio work, which means pro photographers, with expensive gear, under controlled conditions. Results on film depend largely on lens resolution first. Each lens has a character that's resulted from a mix of length, number of elements, aperture performance and coatings. Then you have to deal with the conditions under which the film is being developed, and the accuracy of the scan. Overall, as long as there is a clear control over all aspects of taking a photo, be it on film or digital, it will result in the desired results, taking into account all the limitations of the gear you're using, of course. And it should lead to the least amount of post-processing.
I used Gold 200 for years until I tried Fujifilm (can't remember exactly which one), and I found it to be "fresher" in its appearance. I haven't shot much in a while but monochrome has a fascination for me, mainly because that's what I used when I started using a camera as a 12 year old and now in my late 60's I'd like to do it again with the same (now vintage!) camera😁. Love your videos, Sam, keep up the good work👏👏👏👏
SAM!!!! thank you for taking about the GREEN! thats how I felt as well. I enjoy warmer feelings so I've been shooting strictly Kodak Gold for the passed 2 years. 90% of my photos are with gold and the other being black n white ilford HP5 and Ilford XP2. Really enjoy your videos. Keep up the good work!
Nobody on UA-cam has a better smile.
What a trip! Quality over quantity. Your videos are always worth waiting for.
@@tedphillips2951 thank you ☺️
Portra 160 should be shot between ISO120-ISO80. Exposing for the shadows renders most of the colour tones properly, and it leads to rich highlights as well. Contrast and saturation are the only aspects that would need be worked on after developing, although you can control that through the chemical process to some extent.
I understand exactly what you meant when I saw the gold 200 shot and I can feel it emotionally as well.
loved the video and all the photos you took! where did you buy your "do noy x-ray" film pouch?
It was gifted from a friend who works at Kodak~
It is unfortunate how different the 120mm gold 200 is from the 35mm, and it's been a common complaint for years, I wonder if there is some sort of production difference at the factories that kodak hasn't fixed.
Do you send the pictures to the people that you photograph? I feel like the bikers or the mother of the two boys would love to have them. Please tell me you share them with them. 😊
Love your videos. Such a great vibe!
not to worry Sam, everyone has a " what the??" moment when starting film photography, or a new film, I had a lot of trouble getting a 'roll' off, safe; it took me three rolls [120] 🙂; but Now I get it, as mostly shooting buildings, seascapes, bridges, cars etc. choosing the best film for the genre you shoot is hard, I have shot Acros 100, EkTar 100 and gold 200 so hard to choose which works best. B&W is also a choice, but depends if shape or colour takes your fancy more. Also if unsure about a film, having the right camera helps to, as say a Bronica, or Hasselblad H1/H2 (6x4.5), or a Hasselblad 500 series (6x6) has a magasine, not insert only, like the 645N so you can switch mid roll, so if a scene "wants" portra, B&W aka Ilford HP5+, or other options, like low or high asa, you can switch and do the right film for conditions, also making best use of the film, for the scene presented to you.
I guess we're a lot to relate with your experience. With the "new" Portra the higher ISO they are, the better. Too bad 800 is that expensive now, but it has never disappointed me unlike the 160 whatever the format... But I know a bunch of photographers who make great work with it. 10 years ago I found a bunch of Portra 160 VC/NC that sit in my freezer since. I've only tried one NC and, somehow, the vibe reminded me of 16mm film and I liked it. One friend gave me a 120 version of an expired 160NC that hasn't been stored properly. Strong yellow cast but it was easy to neutralize it. And, so far, it's my best experience with any Portra 160, old or new. I've found a not so expensive expired 160VC in 4x5, don't know how it will turn but 'I'm excited to figure out 🙂
I actually like the cooler palette ! I think it allows for much better color separation.
I still have faith in this film and will keep trying!!
Thanks for sharing :). So some people like grain and sometimes travel shots Gold 200 would be fine. But when you want fine grain film stocks like Portra 160 or Ektar 100 for more pro stuff or if you are like me and like a nice clean image then you have to pay the higher price and get film like this. But Gold 200 has been a great over all every day shooter film and I have had decent luck with it as well.
I just saw the same old biker gang here in Forks, Wa a few days ago. They were traveling through headed South on highway 101. Probably a different chapter but the same jackets anyway.
I really wish I had a wider lens there, there were many of them, couldn't get all of them in the group shot!! :(
great video, but one thing, as at 4:20 if you want greens and reds to 'pop' in colour, try Kodak EkTar 100 I have, and shot my local botanical gardens with it, great colour, bright and vibrant, and also for BRIGHT conditions, the 100 means less worries about over-exposing highlights, Glare, etc.
lol.. wait till you figure out that you should carry a color meter and some CC filters with you. NC looks great between 4800-5200k . You need to correct the light coming into the lens then it looks amazing. Same thing goes for chrome! Most non commercial photographers can’t wrap their brains around this. But it’s the best way to handle your film if you like good neutral colors. If you do get filters don’t neglect the magenta and green . Back in the day 3 inch wratten filters on the Mamiya rz67 lens shade was the standard methodology along with a Minolta color meter.
I love portra 160! It’s just too expensive to use as much - i tend to use gold 200 as it’s cheaper and only for sunny days 🎉 if i could I’d use portra 400 all the time - it’s such a versatile film stock 😊
160 on medium is definitely a challenge handheld
I've shot a lot of Portra 400 and loved it but Gold is special. And portra 160 is lacking the things that make 400 so nice. It isn't airy and pastel it's green and muddy. I just don't like 160. (Favorite film stock is still Ektar)
So many fun and unique people.
that's what I'm mostly excited about when traveling..
I prefer the tiny warm glow of Gold 200 (in 135). ❤
the Califonia golden color :)
I shoot landscape most of the time, so gold 200 doesn't work for me. It's too grainy, even in medium format.
for the price, might as well shoot portra 400 @200
Photographing on Vision 250D I understood that I don’t need not only Portra, but also Gold 😂
LoL 250D is indeed very nice!!
i like shooting portra 160 on 35mm and gold on 120
I tried Portra 160 on 35 just once, it looks even greener than 120 I think lol~
i like the cooler tones of portra. gold can be too warm sometimes. i shoot portra 160 on 35mm because the grain is still finer than gold on 120
I always choose gold 200 over portra; I just don’t like the way portra looks.
Meh. I agreed.
Gold 200 to me is terrible for scenes with lots of green and yellow
First !
Congrats!!!
😢
I couldn’t get through the video because of all the piano music in the background which was loud l, unnecessary, and completely annoying. Especially the first song was Christmas music and it’s early September still. Sorry, just giving you honest feedback.
Thank you for your feedback, I’ll be more careful with my music choice and editing in the future:)