kodak supra 800 & portra 800
L. Jou
I'm new to this newsgroup and I have a question to ask. Can someone
compare Kodak supra 800 and portra 800 to me? Thank you! :)
L. Jou
Kinon
Portra=muted colors, low contrast, slightly better grain.
"L. Jou" <l....@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:0CXI9.51255$hK4.4...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Bill Tuthill
> Supra=higher contrast, slightly more vivid colors.
> Portra=muted colors, low contrast, slightly better grain.
Except for the grain issue, I agree. However Portra has changed a lot
for unknown reasons (perhaps Kodak is still twiddling the emulsion)
so it's hard to generalize. Supra 800 seems to have been quite stable.
Here's a comparison with samples:
Kinon
point. But the differences I saw were pretty slight. And, I didn't like
either film very much.
"Bill Tuthill" <ca_cr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:uv9k3gm...@corp.supernews.com...
Dan Carp
"Kinon" <fu...@bout.it> wrote:
>
> Supra=higher contrast, slightly more vivid colors.
> Portra=muted colors, low contrast, slightly better grain.
not quite, Supra is repackaged consumer film, see
news:2OTII3NB37577.4327314815@Gilgamesh-frog.org
Supra and Portra have completely different dye sets, completely
different LIK and reciprocity goals, and as you said completely
different color and contrast goals
Supra is optimized for consumer applications and consumer paper
Portra is optimized for SOME professional applications and
professional papers
The applications where Portra works is where flesh to neutral is more
important than saturation, PORTRAITS
its not simply a matter of contrast, in fact if you measure contrast
you will find Portra has MORE neutral contrast, but less seperation
color
contrast
its a matter of spectral sensitivity
its a matter of dyes
its a matter of balancing interimage development effects
its a matter of LIK
its a matter of reciprocity
its a matter of image stability and archivability
its a matter of MANY things
instead of making a PROFESSIONAL film with such characteristics as
high primary saturation,
Kodak has assumed it can repackage a consumer film as a PROFESSIONAL
film and sell it to you for a PROFESSIONAL price, under the auspices
these design characteristics were taken into consideration and
optimized for PROFESSIONAL use, when in fact they have been optimized
for CONSUMER use
what Kodak is doing is perpetrating FRAUD, this is a CRIMINAL issue
in the USA and in light of recent synergy in putting corporate
officers in handcuffs (Adelphia, ENron, Global Crossing, etc.) , THIS
SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN LIGHTLY, to say nothing of possible CLASS ACTION
CIVIL RETRIBUTION
Bill Tuthill
>
> Supra and Portra have completely different dye sets, completely
> different LIK and reciprocity goals, and as you said completely
> different color and contrast goals
LIK = latent image keeping, right?
Supra 800, although based on (or same as) Max 800, is none too good
in the LIK department. I forgot to process a roll for about 1 year,
and when I finally got D&P done, results looked terrible.
Don't consumer films have longer LIK properties?
> The applications where Portra works is where flesh to neutral is more
> important than saturation, PORTRAITS
Although in Photosmart S10 scans, Portra 800 skin colors look too blue.
> its not simply a matter of contrast, in fact if you measure contrast
> you will find Portra has MORE neutral contrast, but less separation
> color contrast
That is a very interesting distinction. I'll have to modify my
graystep.gif file to include primary and secondary colors as well.
> instead of making a PROFESSIONAL film with such characteristics as
> high primary saturation, Kodak has assumed it can repackage a
> consumer film as a PROFESSIONAL film and sell it to you for a
> PROFESSIONAL price, under the auspices these design characteristics
> were taken into consideration and optimized for PROFESSIONAL use,
> when in fact they have been optimized for CONSUMER use
Supra 800 used to cost less than Max 800, but no longer. The latest
B&H USA prices are $6.09 vs $4.99 for Max 800. At my local pro store
NPZ sells for only $3.99, making it a compelling best-buy over Supra.
> what Kodak is doing is perpetrating FRAUD, this is a CRIMINAL issue
> in the USA and in light of recent synergy in putting corporate
> officers in handcuffs (Adelphia, Enron, Global Crossing, etc.),
> THIS SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN LIGHTLY, to say nothing of possible
> CLASS ACTION CIVIL RETRIBUTION
If your goal is to shame Kodak into a price reduction on Supra, I
applaud your efforts. Although I'm using NPH/NPZ now.
JIM
....<cut>.... At my local pro store
> NPZ sells for only $3.99, making it a compelling best-buy over Supra.
Hey Bill, where is "your" store? I usually get my stuff from B&H, but their
NPZ is $4.39.
> If your goal is to shame Kodak into a price reduction on Supra, I
> applaud your efforts. Although I'm using NPH/NPZ now.
Same here, NPH/NPZ are comforting in that they rarely provide unpleasant
surprises. Too bad folks are using so much Fuji junk, it was fun when you
could round Reala up for $2.49;)
Jim
Dan Carp
yes, professionals tend to process them quicker, consumers also tend
to leave film in their camera until it is finished over a period of
time, these considerations go into design of the film's emulsions
this does mean the sensitometry of that consumer film, WILL be
different than aim at the times of professional latent image keeping,
so it is not only a matter that you are getting consumer film
FRAUDENTLY packaged as professional film at
professional prices, you are NOT EVEN GETTING THE CONSUMER FILM
> If your goal is to shame Kodak into a price reduction on Supra
my goal is a criminal FRAUD indictment for selling consumer films
under the auspices that they are professional films, and if you
want to throw in a class action civil suit, I will not complain,
we are putting exectives in handcuffs in USA for indiscrimancy
(Adelphia,Enron,Global Crossing, etc.)
we can put Dan Carp and his smug-town consumer imaging division
chronies in handcuffs too
FRAUD IS ILLEGAL, IT IS CRIMINAL, IT IS NOT CIVIL
mass consumer manipulative fraud, has to end, and this is a fine
place to start
Tony Spadaro
under more than one name --- meaning he is a fraud himself. The strong
suspicion is that Kodak canned him for trying to sabotage the corporation
and this is the only way he can get even.
Apparently the real Dan Carp is the current CEO of Kodak.
--
http://chapelhillnoir.com
and partial home of
The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Links are at
http://home.nc.rr.com/tspadaro/links.html
"Dan Carp" <Anonymous...@See.Comment.Header> wrote in message
news:SIW08W4W3760...@Gilgamesh-frog.org...