> -----Original Message----- > From: Alin Flaider [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > tom wrote: > > t> Portra 160 has lower grain if not underexposed. If > underexposed it > t> looks like crap. > > t> I usually shot it at 100. > > True, the 160NC has little tolerance to exposure. I remember that > even the DX coding is for 1 EV exposure latitude, just like slide > film. > > If exposed precisely at 160, it's very rich in > tonalities. However, > some prefer it at 100/125 for a bit more saturation. I > tried it at > 125 ASA and found little gain in colour saturation, > improved grain > but it also lost some of its ability to compensate for the large > contrasts.
You're probably correct, I tended to base my preferences on large samples, which included quite a bit of exposure variation. In other words, on average my prints looked better at 100, thought the the ones that hit 160 precisely looked ok. I will say I did test the 400UC fairly critically (for me) and found at 400 it was very slightly under. In general I think Kodak is a 1/2 stop too generous...Fuji always seemed right on the money. tv
