Portra 400 / Fuji Pro 400H Comparison
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 окт 2024
- The Darkroom Film Index: thedarkroom.co...
In a dramatic turn of events, Jason realizes portra 400 and fuji pro 400h aren't that different after all.
Prints: graincheck.dar...
Cameras: Hasselblad 501c
Instayams: @50_shades_of_jason
Epidemic Sound, first 30 days free: share.epidemics...
================
Business Inquiries: pigmodegraingang@gmail.com
I'd say the biggest difference between the two films is one is still being produced
Mark my words, we’ll see Fuji stop all film production in the next 4-5 years. They’ve already publicly stated their intent to throw all their weight into their medical and pharmaceutical arms.
This was brutal
I came here to write this!
LMAO!!!
:(
Baxter needs his own show called the Barkroom
I appreciate you a lot for this
Nicely done
Baxter's appearances:
1. 00:19
2. 01:53
3. 02:45
4. 04:52
5. 05:54
6. 06:58
7. 07:53
Thanks amigos
This is his channel
Tank you
PSA, bruh.
Hello again old friend
@@ModernAtomX hello amigo
“especially the reds, oranges, knees and toes” you never fail to make me laugh out loud, genuinely 💛✌️
Big grins, he even makes herpes funny.
Wedding photographers loved 400H as the white dress comes out white and not a bit yellow. Honestly that’s it. Everything is just more neutral when it comes to printing. It can be warmed up in post whereas Portra can’t easily be cooled. Worked at labs for over 15 years and had most wedding photographers shoot Fuji on the day and some may go for Kodak for the engagement shoot for that warm vibe.
I think the neutral tones work best with Instax and Provia 100f but seems to be more situational with color negative. Almost always found myself wanting Portra over 400h in like 98% of situations. Still sucks that it's gone and even worse is that it's being price gouged despite Fuji confirming there was enough supply for awhile.
Idk man. I don't think it's just wedding photographers...I genuinely prefer the Fuji tones over Portra, and I mainly shoot portrait and editorial. It's also retains colours so much nicer when overexposing.
@@lanycera of course not only wedding photographers :) they just benefited more than others. I also prefer Fuji's more true to life look preferring Superia 400 for my colour work back in the day.
@Linda Ultramax 400 may be the closest thing these days. Not as heavy a yellow/warm cast as most Kodak stock. Fuji C200 is now manufactured in the USA so almost certainly made in the Kodak factory and some do believe it's just Gold 200 inside. Yet to see enough results or used it myself to determine what is like exactly.
So sad that 400h is gone, always preferred it over Portra, especially for Darker Skin which Portra often butchers
Ektar handles darker skin tones much better than 400H. At least in my experience in the studio
Ektar and Pro Image (sadly only 35mm…) are infinitely better than Portra--160 is the only speed that holds a torch
I would sell my soul for a video with more comparisons between lab scans and the home scans
I must say, It makes sense now. Daniel Milnor made a point on his channel that almost no film is actually rated at box speed but around half a stop or a stop under advertised, so technically overexposing by roughly one stop would mean exposing correctly. (Sorry for my grammar) Thank you for your film sacrifice. For science!
It’s more nuanced than that. In terms of exposure, dan’s point was more about black and white high iso films. When you shoot film, the light causes a chemical reaction which varies depending on the amount of light and the film negative. Other factors include development chemicals and temperature. So for color film, shooting portra, for example, one or two stops over exposed increases saturation and provides a better rendition for portraits. It isn’t simply about increasing the exposure of the image. The reason why so many people are confused by Dan’s video is because the factors are so varied in the outcome of a film photo that simply reducing it to: over exposing = better, doesn’t explain it well enough (not that he said that)
No, overexposing means exposing for shadows in this case with film latitude preserving highlights.
As an expert, I have to say this is the best film comparison video ever made.
I’d love to see Kodak Gold vs Superia. It sucks because right when I found my film stick to use as my work horse, they cut the supply two months later. It is what it is at this point I guess. Ektar is a solid fill in choice I just wish I had different box speeds to start with.
Superia Premium definitely feels like a solid choice. Doesn't have the green casts like regular superia does but has grain similar to Pro400h. Too bad it's only sold in Japan for some reason
I'm still salty to this day that 400h was cancelled
was the KKK photographed on 400H or something?
Wouldn't be opposed to seeing a comparison between your two favorite b&w film stocks
seconded: Kodak T-Max 100 vs Ilford FP4 plus
@@briglnai a better comparison would probably be delta 100 seeing as FP4 is a classic cubic grained film (like Tri-X, HP5).
I'm saving my last Pro 400H for photography in the forest or when I go back up to Oregon. I really like the greens that it produces in a forest.
So, you're an Oregon Transplant?
swagg.
It’s so funny the Portra vs pro400h argument. One this I know is that if you live somewhere incredibly green like Wales, or the U.K. more generally, the tones of pro400h pop like firework, even on slightly overcast days. They’re both just so good though
Jason! Love your videos but no mention or test for the fourth emulsion layer with 400h? It was specifically developed to combat the frequent mixed lighting in Japan (esp. fluorescent light) which is probably why it rendered the night shot better. Also, Kodak was developed with white skin in mind and Fuji with (relatively) browner skin in mind.
Greener tones of Fuji Pro 400H is probably to make skin look whiter, which is very much sought after in portraits around Asia🤓
I love the personality that comes through… “… the only way I can feel anything anymore.” Makes the channel more fun and unique
Provia & Ektachrome, both pro level ISO 100 slide films and somewhat famous for their way of blue color rendition. Could be a very interesting comparison.
I mean this in a complementary way, Baxter lowkey built like a scantron
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN
Just picked up a 5 pack of 120 Pro400h to take to Vermont. Really excited it give it a try
the subtle, dry humor was appreciated
Would love to see HP5 compared with another B&W film (Tri-X?)
Another awesome video and comparison. I started to come around on Pro 400H now that its dead and gone. Such a damned shame that I was too cool for it when it was here. RIP.
Great video as always, Jason, but when is the video on 110 film?
Just discovered your channel. Photography needs this seriousness. Important work. Well done. 🙃
Lots o' work went in to this. Thanks for making me feel I just spent months stuffing my freezer with 400h when i could've stuck with Portra.
The difficulty with film stock is that every roll is so expensive. You can’t buy film at the supermarket checkout anymore. Thanks for the video.
Unfortunate but true. I try to make those film shots count
I like Thursdays thanks to you, Jason. Thanks.
Portra 400 still exists, pro 400h it's just a memory. that's the difference between then.
I can't even remember his na- I mean film speed
I got 13 rolls in my fridge, still exists for me..... for now :'(
@@quasarcreator Me too ! 4 packs of 5 rolls in the fridge :-) and still good till 2023
I feel like Gold 200 and Fujicolour C200 might be an interesting comparison, the budget side of things for all us non-hasselblad owners
That serial killer line had me dying 😂
Found a full box of Pro400H at the camera store the other day, I’m taking it with me from Texas to NY today if this plane will ever take off. Hoping for some cool shit.
Talk technical to me. I love this. Great coverage on both film stocks. Great execution and of course top notch humor. I’m addicted to your videos
wish every film comparison video was like this exactly
Im glad you covered the 'reds, oranges, knees and toes' most people leave that out but you know your shit
I am getting ready to send exposed rolls of Ektar 100, Fuji Superia X-TRA 400 and some Kodak Ultra 400 to The Darkroom. They do good work. Another good video.
So, I finally tried your method of exposing fuji pro 400h at ASA 200 on a couple of rolls. The results were the best I've ever gotten from that film. Too bad I discovered this with only a few rolls left in my freezer. Anyway, great comparison.
0:28 Guy Fieri
finally recognized as a philosopher! :) Awesome @grainydays :D
One of the most important questions of our time; Thank you!
I myself have pondered the Big Question. But since I don't have a camera with a swappable film back, the Big Question I couldn't answer. Thank you! But now of course it doesn't matter much. I have a few of rolls of 400H left in my freezer stock. Yes indeed, 'overexpose' (de-rate the exposure index rating) to get the best results, that's been my general experience for color negative film.
Nice one mate. I just loaded a roll of Pro 400H into a back and it’s cloudy. So now I know that back will stay out for another day 🤦🏻♂️
Dude I love your content!!! But giving that guy a “dunking tutorial” made me laugh so hard!!! So Good!
30 years ago it was all about NPH160 and Pro160s - that’s what all my commercial clients wanted. Some days they were lucky if they got Gold100 that had been sitting on the studio window ledge all summer……
I'd say the common denominator for both films is your dry humour (Canadian spelling). Very timely video as I'm starting to shoot film again and I snagged 15 rolls of 400H exp 12/23. Good to know that there is always Portra 400.
Just wanna say that I'm a big fan of yours
This was so good and fun. As someone who makes digital emulations as well as shoots film, I've learned that even the same stock is often so different depending on processing etc. I would also love to see a digital side by side in these scenes as a modern control, but I know you would feel filthy for doing it.
Great comparison! Guess I will be using lomo metropolis
Waiting for this for years
Ribsy made a comparsion of these two for people with darker skin. Apparently the fuji is pretty flattering. That video should be an honorable mention in this.
Laughing about myself thinking what a great idea it was zu take photos of actual color charts. Would never have thought of this. Must be the reason you are sitting on this side of the camera and I on the receiving side.
Great Video! I'd love see an Ektar vs Ektachrome comparison in 120 and 35mm.
Nice, you got a REAL Hasselblad back.
Kodak Gold vs Fuji Superia, since they seem to be the standard recommendation for "cheap" film stock
(Might be hard to compare since box speed is different)
maybe Fuji C200 is worth a shot
Now definitely something that would be interesting is Ektachrome vs. Velvia
Very cool and informative video Jason, it'd be interesting to see the difference between a scan at home and a lab scan side by side. Keep up the work.
this is exactly what i needed! thank you baxter, i mean jason
How about we get a comparison of Portra 800 to Cinestill 800t.
kind of obvious
I’ve made one, feel free to check it out.
Nice comparison. The lab owner told me pro400h is actually a 200iso film. Maybe that’s why shooting at box speed makes its shades grainy.
I would say the ture value of pro400h lies on its ability of being pushed to 1600iso and still maintain a relatively neutral color comparing to portra 400/800.
I happen to order some Pro400h the day before they made the announcement. It sits in the freezer because I am not much of a fan... Thanks for the comparison though, its nice to see the two side by side here.
I have said this so many times to so many photographers from 2004 to now. The only difference in these stocks is Kodak is a studio grade film. It prefers to be indoors while Fujifilm is better outside. That's the difference. I give the versatility to kodak again and again because it transitions outside to darker settings so well in low light and Fuji has knows this for years.
Really good A/B comparison. Would totally be interested in more of this.
How about with... slide film?
I’d like to see a comparison of Portra and Lomography 400 or even Portra 160 vs Ektar!!
my LCS has about 1k rolls of pro 400h left and selling for 10 dollars a roll. I love how 400h looks, so everytime i drive by i always pick up a box. I think im up to 50 rolls in my fridge. 400h, is cheaper than portra (at least in Canada, 10 dollars vs 18 dollars) and the quality looks amazing.
I like both of thees film stocks but I fo prefer Fuji a little bit more.
Here are some of my findings and pros for each one based on personal experience if compare two of them.
Fuji:
1. Nicer greens and blues (greens are one of the best in class)
2. Handles whites very good when overexposed with less color cast if recover highlights in post processing.
3. Sharper image (has to do anything with mate finished plastic base?)
4. Images look more "dimentional" or the subject pops up more.
Portra:
1. Easier to get pleasing skin tone (white skin)
2. Could be safely pushed 1 stop (with Fuji it is more inconsistent (color shift) and more grainy)
3. I found portra works better with flash light (white balance and colors are more accurate)
4. Grain is finer
Hes back finally 🤟🏽🤟🏽🤟🏽
I love Fuji Pro 400H! Often I use Portra 400 for special projects.
I am happy to see Monica in your video. You should include her more often. Personally, I have found Fuji film to be much better than Kodak, although I shoot both. I shot some black and white Fuji Acros II 100 that looks like digital (very clean) and some regular Fuji Superia x-tra 400 color stuff that looks great that I get at my local lab.
I think we can all agree, the world needs more reviews of Baxter's level of good boy on different film stocks, no more colour charts, no more LOG colour space, we shall now use BLOGB (Baxter's Level of Good Boy)
This was such a good comparison
Comparing two budget films could be fun.
You’re so real. Subscribed.
would love to see a comparison between lomo 800 and Portra 800
Yes, I always over exposed pro400h! Havent used it for a while but forget about it, pro400h is too pricy now. I am comparing provia 100 and Ektarchrome. please do this one as well!!
I’ve always leaned towards the 400H for landscapes and Portra 400 for skin tones 🤷♂️.
BTW, your mom looks really cute with Baxter.
Can you do a video on how you do those cool 3d parallax edits with your photos at the end of your videos?? Ive been dying to find a way to do that!
I'm definitely a Kodak Portra 400 and 160 guy. I'm still fuming that all the peel-apart film is gone and Fuji doesn't see film as having a future in their business.
Adox Color Implosion for wedding photography!
Yeah, considering how Fuji and Kodak were similar priced, i don't get the praise 400H received. Then again, what else did Fuji had in 120 with ISO400?
Fuji Pro 400H is a great film for night or interiors. It would be great to see a video shooting 400H in those conditions, especially shooting only interiores, before it gets completely impossible to buy it at reasonable prices
you still gonna edit it in photoshop the way you like while processing negatives. It there still a difference..?
love it mate, great stuff
Using my lunch to watch this, it's gonna help me get through the day
dude, the lomography metropolis joke made me laugh so loud.
Nearly choked on the comment about Lomo Metropolis LOL. As for the two P400 vs. NPH400, it depends on if the subject matter’s skin tones are pink (Caucasian) or olive / yellow (Asian / POC) as I think the color palette plays to different strengths. Shooting NPH on a cloudy day with pale subjects is not fun to correct in post.
Maybe compare the opposite end of the spectrum with UltraMax 400 vs. Superia X-TRA 400. Or even pit Kodak against itself with ColorPlus 200 vs. Gold 200. Superb fucking comparison by the way. I feel so much more equipped to combat snobs now
I'd love a provia VS ektachrome vid just like this!
That Lomo Metropolis diss had me dying 🤣🤣🤣
Lomo 800 and Portra 800 would be a cool comparison for next time 👍
Would love to see a comparison of all the different flavors of portra
Not surprised. I like Portra more, way less grain and better colors (IMO) in most situations. 400h does look better if you over expose more than a stop bc sometimes Portra can go too warm (almost yellowish depending on the scene).
I always preferred Fujifilm in the "pro" lines, but I've never liked Superia at all. I far preferred Fujicolor Pro800Z over Portra 800. To me, the 400 ISO comparison was always more of a toss up. And then at ISO 160 I prefer Fujicolor Pro 160 NS (which is actually NOT discontinued) to Portra 160.
This is a really good video, i would love to see more like this!
02:06 Funnily enough, I have Jason's picture of a loo hanging in my loo.
miss it so much!
I use Kodak Portra 400 Film Simulation on my XT4 because of you. 😁
I always liked to use Kodak film, but then have my prints made in a lab which used Fuji photo paper. But I also liked the Fuji film itself.
Darker skin tones are so good on the Fuji stock
I always felt that pro 400h responded better to colour correction in post than Portra 400. That warm colour cast in Portra always bothered me and I absolutely hate how it goes all pastel when you over-expose it. RIP pro 400h...
Okay my only question is how you do that zooming effect on the last shoots of this video?! amazing!
I'd love to see an Ektachrome vs. Provia 100F comparison.
Yes I have