tribal-warrior
Member
I admit I have shot very little of Kodak Portra film but I'm thinking of using some Portra 400 film in the future. Just wondering what peoples experiences are with overexposing Portra 400 film - particularly with regards to grain. Did you notice much of a reduction with grain when overexposing this particular film stock?
Through much of my film photography, I have tried to get my exposures spot on regardless if I was shooting on slide or negative film. Though I do admit that there were some occasions where I would deliberately underexpose slide film a little for increased colour saturation. But I would try and avoid overexposure at all costs (even when shooting neg film.)
Years later, I read about the benefits of overexposing negative film. I learned that in the movie industry, the vast majority of cinematographers would deliberately overexpose motion picture negative film. This was to avoid accidental underexposure and also to reduce grain. So some time after that, I tried the same thing with a roll of Fuji consumer negative film for stills. That film may have been a 400asa film but I can't quite recall. I bracketed my exposures but can't remember by how much. I think I may have started with what I determined was a normal exposure and then overexposed by one stop and then overexposed by a larger amount after that (possibly two stops but I really can't remember.)
And I was quite surprised by the results. Overexposing seemed to have had the opposite of what I was expecting. The prints were surprisingly grainy. More grainy than what I would have expected from a 400asa film. I admit this had me puzzled.
Would I likely get different results with overexposing Portra 400 film with regards to grain? Obviously, some grain would be inevitable with 400asa film but I don't want to end up with a ton of grain.
Through much of my film photography, I have tried to get my exposures spot on regardless if I was shooting on slide or negative film. Though I do admit that there were some occasions where I would deliberately underexpose slide film a little for increased colour saturation. But I would try and avoid overexposure at all costs (even when shooting neg film.)
Years later, I read about the benefits of overexposing negative film. I learned that in the movie industry, the vast majority of cinematographers would deliberately overexpose motion picture negative film. This was to avoid accidental underexposure and also to reduce grain. So some time after that, I tried the same thing with a roll of Fuji consumer negative film for stills. That film may have been a 400asa film but I can't quite recall. I bracketed my exposures but can't remember by how much. I think I may have started with what I determined was a normal exposure and then overexposed by one stop and then overexposed by a larger amount after that (possibly two stops but I really can't remember.)
And I was quite surprised by the results. Overexposing seemed to have had the opposite of what I was expecting. The prints were surprisingly grainy. More grainy than what I would have expected from a 400asa film. I admit this had me puzzled.
Would I likely get different results with overexposing Portra 400 film with regards to grain? Obviously, some grain would be inevitable with 400asa film but I don't want to end up with a ton of grain.
