I was wrong about Kodak Portra being the best film for portraits

I ran some tests after reading a 2019 article on Casual Photophile that compared Portra 400 to Fuji Pro 400H side by side. Turns out Pro 400H actually has way better skin tone separation in mixed lighting, which I never would have guessed after years of just grabbing the Kodak every time. Anyone else here dump Fuji after they killed off Pro 400H, or did you switch to something else?

2 comments

2 Comments

wyatt_ross271d ago

You saying Pro 400H had better skin tone separation in mixed lighting - what kind of mixed lighting we talking? Like window light plus tungsten indoors, or more like shade plus sun? I'm curious because I gave up on Fuji film years ago for no good reason except everyone said Kodak was the safe bet, and now I'm wondering if I missed out on something real specific.

valwest1d ago

Was it more of a shade-plus-sun situation when you saw the difference, or something else? I noticed this pattern where everyone just grabs whatever everyone else uses, same as how people always order the same coffee drink because they heard it's the standard. It is wild how much we miss by sticking with one safe choice just because it is popular.