Mike Buckles , May 13, 2005; 01:12 a.m.
I'm going to a Renaissance Fair this weekend, weather is supposed to
be partly cloudy (some sun), could be clouded over at times. What
Kodak film would be a good bet to shoot? I have a couple of trial
rolls of Kodak Ultra 400, and the grain is good for the speed of
that film, but I wanted something a bit slower too...which would be
better, Kodak Ultra 100 or Portra 160 VC? I do want a film that's
saturated, and with the costumes and such, want a higher contrast. I
do plan on using fill flash, so I'm not as worried about shadows.
I'm also taking shots of my friends who will be swordfighting, fast
paced. Even with fill flash, for those shots, am I better off using
the Ultra 400 due to the action? I've used the 400 and the 160vc
before, love them both, just wondered about the 100UC.
Mike Buckles , May 13, 2005; 01:14 a.m.
Forgot to mention, I wanted to take some slides too...would E100G be good for the colorful costumes? I shoot alot of Kodachrome64, but am afraid if it's too overcast, it might not fit this occasion.
John Shriver 
, May 13, 2005; 08:08 a.m.
The Kodachrome 64 will look better in low contrast lighting, since it is so intensely contrasty. If you choose E100, make it E100GX, since it is designed for outdoor use where you may be shooting subjects lit by blue sky. E100G is too neutral, really designed for completely controlled studio lighting, far to easy to get "blue" results outside.
Les Sarile , May 13, 2005; 09:53 a.m.
I was at a Faire myself and I would certainly use 160VC again. Even though it is a bit garinier then 100UC, it is manageable even for poster size. The colors are definitely more vivid then 100UC without post processing so it's great straight to print. I have examples of both in my Film 2 Album along with others and the 160VC example was taken from the faire.
If is turns out to be a sunny day I would certainly use Agfa Ultra 100 too, but if you're having to resort to using flash then I would not recommend it at all.
Good luck and have fun as that is one of my favorite events to go to as well.
Bill Jordan , May 13, 2005; 10:54 a.m.
Mike,
No film suggestion, but if you can get close enough to the action, you might try some slow sync flash on the swordfights. That would incorporate some motion blur that might look pretty cool. This is where the instant feedback of digital really provides a benefit. Now if they'd just drop those DSLR prices below $500...
Have fun.
Bill
Bill Tuthill 
, May 13, 2005; 12:07 p.m.
Mike, I think you're making it too complicated. I would use just
one film, 160VC or UC100 if it's sunny, and UC400 if it's cloudy.
Generally UC100 is considered more saturated and higher contrast
than 160VC, but because it's a 200 speed film, it will have more
shadow detail than 160VC if rated at box speed. UC100 skin tones are
fine, so I can't recommend one over the other. However I admonish
you to avoid Agfa Ultra 100 for people -- there are lots of people
at any Ren Faire. Slow-sync or rear-curtain flash is a great idea
for the swordfights. If you want slides, have Dale Labs process,
print, and slide-dupe your film. That way you don't have to decide
when to shoot slides or not. Cost is reasonable.
Steven Zellner , May 13, 2005; 12:23 p.m.
Mike:
This posting has both a suggestion and a question.
First, the suggestion. If you are going to use Portra 160, be sure that your processing lab can develop and print it properly. My experience has been that consumer processing (even the Kodak processing lab) does not produce satisfactory results. I have had good results from a variety of pro and mass market labs when processing the UC films, including the HD200 emulsion, which brings me to my question - for Bill.
Bill, you mentioned that the UC100 emulsion is a 200-speed film. My suspicion is that you are correct - from examining the Kodak data sheets for the 100 and 200-speed emulsions in this family. Nevertheless, could you elaborate further, re exposing the 200-speed film (have a my share at home) at an EI of 100?
Bill Tuthill , May 13, 2005; 03:27 p.m.
Forgot to mention: I find 160VC quite muddy in overcast weather, so
I really mean it about 400UC if it's cloudy. I don't have
enough experience with UC100 to know how it performs in overcast
weather.
Steven, my tests indicated UC100 had -4 stops of underexposure
latitude; -3 is typical for wide-latitude films. In his Sep/Oct 2004
review for Photo Techniques magazine, Ctein said UC100 is
"identical in speed to Portra 160."
In Europe a similar film is sold as Elite Color 200.
Craig Shearman 
, May 13, 2005; 10:25 p.m.
I don't understand why people are living in the 1970s and shooting 100 and 160-speed color negative. There is so little difference in grain now between 160 and 400 professional films such as the Kodak Portra series that you can just stick with the 400, especially for a shoot like this where it's cloudy and you need the speed. If you're making prints large enough where the grain is an issue, then you shouldn't be shooting 35 and should move up to medium format.
Mike Buckles , May 13, 2005; 10:33 p.m.
I would love to shoot in med format, but i'm really afraid of investing $$$ in the equipment, only to have emulsion after emulsion go away due to digital. I do agree, the Kodak Ultra 400 has great grain for it's speed. The 160/100 speeds do have a bit less grain, even in smaller print sizes. (not a huge difference, but a little).
