Good skin tones and fairly good latitude in different lighting situations.

Low light photography without a flash does not appear to produce consistent results.

In order to realize the full benefit of Portra film, you must use Kodak Portra paper at a good professional lab if you want to have the color contrast levels that this film is capable of.

Customer Service

Kodak has very good responsive support for this product.

Similar Products Used:

Fuji NPS 160
Kodak Portra 160VC

none

I shot a wedding and everyone came out blue. Kind of strange I thought until I read some of these posts. I had the lab reprint them three times and they got better. Also noticed too much grain, especially for ISO 400 film. Won't use it again

Too unpredictable... too many problems to work out before I would trust my work to this film.

Similar Products Used:

None

For the type of shooting I do, outdoor/nature, none.

The contrast is very low. Color is anemic. Tough to scan. Expensive.

This film is very disappointing. The 160VC version is quite good so this film was a major disappointment. Prints, even from a pro lab who knows how to do Portra, were mediocre at best. I was told that under artificial light in controlled situations it does well. I rarely pan a film, there is usually something OK about it. But this one... Well, don't buy too much of it without trying a few first.

Customer Service

N/A

Similar Products Used:

For prints, I use Kodak Supra 100,400.

Good skin tones (particularly when printed on anything other than high-contrast, high-saturation minilab papers), and nicely saturated colours

Grain. Portra also tends to be on the expensive side - at least, here in Canada.

This film seems to be popular among medium-format photographers, and if I used their larger negatives, I'd like it too. But for 35mm, the grain is annoying - it's just too grainy at 8x10". Use 160VC instead.

Similar Products Used:

Portra 160VC, Supra 400, PJ400

I used VC400 at cycling races and got excellent results. Good color, low grain, use a good lab and you get good results.

none really

I tried using PJ400 and I thought is was inferior to VC400.

Customer Service

na

Similar Products Used:

Royal Gold 400
Ektapress PJ400

Just enough color saturation between this film and NC to make it worthwhile.
Finer grain than Royal Gold and MAX films

Have it processed at at a good Kodak lab. If you get this film processed at a Fuji lab it will be green! Would not recommend for low light.

Have it processed at a GOOD Kodak lab preferably a pro lab. I've had good results from 1 hr. Kodak labs but better from a pro lab. Suggest good lighting or good flash for this film. Not an all purpose film! Excellent results with good lighting.

Similar Products Used:

Max 400, Royal Gold, Fuji 400

Won't be using it again.

I shot several roles with this film at a wedding and despite processing at a professional camera store at only 4x6, It had astonishingly noticable graininess. The other roles I had developee with it (including Portra 160VC) were not nearly as grainy. I found a regular 1-hour lab that didn't want to process in house, but instead shoce to send it into their main office for processing. It didn't help.

I haven't dabbled much in the professional portriat film arena, but for all future excursions, I will be using the tried-and-true Fuji films.

Similar Products Used:

Fuji Superia 100
Fuji Reala Kodak Porta 160VC
Kodak Royal Gold 400 & 800

I disagree with the previous posts. It looks like the bad results are due to unprofessional printing. I've used this film only once and the results were quite good. Accurate skin tones, vivid colors. it is a bit on the contrasty side though. grain is ok.

I think you need a very good lab to print this film.

I'll use this product again (esp. for portraits), since the colors came out quite accurate. If you're not shooting people then you might wanna stick with something else.

Customer Service

none

Similar Products Used:

Reala 100, PJ100, PJ400, Fujipress 800, Royal gold 400

Virtually no grain at 8 x 10 enlargements. To me, this is fantastic for a 400 speed film.

Lack of shadow detail in low light situations

I shot 25 rolls of this film while in Nepal last October. Mostly outdoor scenics and candid portraits with a few nightime flash shots. I noticed a definate "red" tone on the enlargements but not on the proofs. I talked with the lab and they admitted they tend towards the "red". After re-doing the enlargements, they were great. I will admit I wouldn't call this a "vivid color" film. More like "vivid contrast". Shadow detail is easily lost.

Similar Products Used:

None

None

This film was very frustrating. It represented my first venture into "professional" film. I was shooting a special ocassion with my F100 Nikon, and the results were frightening. The skin tones were completely gone, and everyone looked cadaveric. In spite of the "enhanced" color of this film, there still was none. ( I guess two times zero is still zero). I was embarrased to present these pictures to my relatives as a gift!! Since then, I have shot similar situations with drugstore package Fuji 400 film with better color saturation. I still have 2 rolls of the stuff, and don't know what to do with it.

Avoid this film.

Customer Service

None

Similar Products Used:

Fuji Superia 400, Kodak Gold 400, Fuji Super HG 400