Kim Hildebrand: Portra 800 Four Ways

Oh how I love a good film test!  So when I saw this post my friend Kim Hildebrand posted on her blog, I knew I had to share it!  Fascinating! -Sandra

From Kim:

A major business goal of mine this year is to be able to shoot family sessions with film 100% of the time this Fall.  I am so completely hooked on everything about film – from the tonal range, the luminosity, the depth of field, the highlight retention, to the creamy skin tones!

A huge part of getting a consistent ‘look’ with film, besides picking one lab to work with, is choosing your go-to film.  Different films render colors, highlights and shadows in different ways.

I’ve narrowed down my favorite outdoor film for shooting in Seattle (which tends to have blue/green light almost all the time) as gorgeous Portra 800.  I had been asking around how I should rate this in a full-sun situation.  Some filmies said box speed, some said 640, some swore by 400, and a few even said 200!  Feeling a bit overwhelmed, I decided to do my own test.  I recruited my amazing, beautiful friend to be my model one sunny day at noon.

I shot five rolls of film rated at:  Portra 800 at 800, 640, 400, 200; and p160 rated at 160.  I shot part of the roll in full-sun and the second part in open shade to see which rating would give me the best results and best ideal shutter speeds for shooting locally.  How did I meter, you ask?  For each roll, I compared four ways to meter:  bulb-in @ 45 degrees, bulb in – in the darkest shadow of my subject, in-camera meter (+2) on subject’s forehead (I use the Pentax 645n), and the Sunny-16 rule.  I was impressed that for the most part that all four metering methods were giving me the same reading.  (All rolls developed and scanned by Richard Photo Lab.)

This first comparison also shows how color and skin tones rendered in full sun with p800 and the last roll – Portra 160:

p800comparisons1cropped

Comparison of Portra 800 only:

p800comparisonssun2-1cropped
:)

Look at how forgiving Portra 800 is!  I was blown away when I saw the results.  I really thought I would see more differences since rating at 200 is already two stops over box speed.   I am also amazed at how well a good lab can make your scans look consistent, even when rated differently.  There is a 4-stop difference between the p800 rated at 800, shot at f2.8 @ 1000 vs. p800 rated at 200, shot at f2.8 @ 250!  So develop a relationship with, and love your lab. Please see my straight-scan comparison I added at the end of the post.

And here are the same comparisons in the shade, last roll Portra 160:

p800comparisonshade1cropped

Comparison of Portra 800 only:

p800comparisonshade2-1cropped

Edited to add:

I found out RPL tried to match up scans from the rolls into one cohesive set since all rolls were submitted in one order.  I asked them to re-scan one image from each roll and do a straight scan since I was testing exposure.  A straight scan means that the lab doesn’t do any adjusting.  Here are the results:

p800comparisons.sun.straight.scan

I’m still quite surprised to see there is not much difference in exposure, colors, or contrast.  I can see a difference in skin tone but that may be attributed to the difference in the field used.  640 was taken in an adjacent field with less green.

What differences do you see?  Which is your favorite?

I hope you found this helpful!