I assume you mean the Portra talk? I usually try films at different speeds, because sometimes the rated ISO doesn't result in a negative that scans well or prints to my satisfaction. It's just a matter of pleasing one's individual taste. Rating Portra 400VC at 320 overexposes it by less than half a stop. It just seems to give it a little bit better shadow detail and a little more contrast. Portra 160 at 100, on the other hand is more than a half stop overexposed, almost a full stop. But I think it is severely lacking in contrast at 160, at least the way the labs I use process it. What's more, all my meters are calibrated to be dead on. They don't have the built in overexposure that some late model cameras have. Kodak's ratings may be adjusted to allow for contemporary meters. In any case, I go with what works for me. Paul
Cameron Hood wrote: > I would like a repeat of 'the Provia talk'. Why shoot at 320 and 100 instead > of the rated speeds, and, more importantly, why would Kodak lie? > > C. > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
