Kodak Tri-X 400 and Portra 400

[Ronnie99]

Hi everyone,



I find that the majority of film stocks that I like from photographers like Herb Ritts or Avedon used Kodak Tri- X.



I also like this look using Portra 400 although I don't usually shoot like this.







Any advice on how to get these looks using presets or other methods?

Thanks so much

 

[Night Pixel]

If you shoot Fujifilm the Kodachrome recipe is here.

Here is the one for Tri-X 400 .

 

[Corius]

I have the RNI Lightroom presets and both of these film stocks are included.

 

[Ronnie99]

If you shoot Fujifilm the Kodachrome recipe is here.

Here is the one for Tri-X 400 .

 

[NAwlins Contrarian]

I find that the majority of film stocks that I like from photographers like Herb Ritts or Avedon used Kodak Tri- X.

I also like this look using Portra 400 although I don't usually shoot like this.

Any advice on how to get these looks using presets or other methods?

Shorter answer: you might try the Nik Collection, which is currently available as the latest edition for $149 from DxO (https://shop.dxo.com/en/nik-collection-5.html), and you can probably still get for free the old 'Google' version, which is now a decade old and somewhat limited compared to newer editions, but capable and, on most hardware-software combinations, fairly functional (especially for the price!). Nik includes Silver Efex that offers various B&W film emulations, Color Efex that offers various color film emulations, and other modules.

Fuller answer:

There are lots of commercial software offerings, and some free / open-source ones, that claim to provide the look of particular films. In general I'm somewhat skeptical of how accurately they work, but I wouldn't say they're total nonsense, and some people find them helpful. Although I shot film for many years before going digital, my memory of various film looks is certainly subject to vagueness, misapprehensions, and biases.

Personally I have and occasionally use both DxO FilmPack 6 Elite (FilmPack is currently available as $139 "Elite" and $85 "Essential" editions from DxO) and the Nik Collection, both previously the free Google version and now DxO's revamped Nik Collection (albeit I'm one version behind). FilmPack integrates completely as a module in my favorite raw converter, DxO PhotoLab. The Nik Collection, even the very latest DxO release, only partially integrates with anything else--DxO, Adobe Photoshop / Lightroom, etc. Both also run just fine in standalone mode. On the whole, IMO the Nik Collection is more powerful and flexible than FilmPack.

And a word about films: there were / are multiple different "Kodak Tri-X [and] Portra 400" films. The version of Nik Color Efex in DxO version 4 will emulate the slightly older Portra 400NC (lower contrast and saturation) and Portra 400VC (higher contrast and saturation), but maybe not the current Portra 400 (which may or may not correspond directly to one of the prior-generation Portra 400 films). Tri-X is even trickier. Putting aside Tri-X 320, which was always notably different, Kodak totally reformulated Tri-X 400 at some point (1990s?). Just what those differences do is a subject of some controversy. And although C-41 development for the Portra films is very standardized, Tri-X's appearance can differ substantially depending on how you develop it. Personally I prefer Ilford DD-X at 1+4 but ...

 

[Greg Edwards]

There's two solutions I like. One is based around LUT profiles, and the other is Lightroom presets. Neither however are cheap!

Profiles & Styles – The Archetype Process

Mastin Labs – Presets and LUTs Born From Film

As mentioned elsewhere in this thread. It's worth remembering that there's different interpretations of what a specific negative film looks like. It depends how the film is processed and scanned. As such, The Archetype Process profiles emulates different scanners and their settings, and Mastin is all based on the Frontier scanner and offers a "toolbox" that emulates various settings on that scanner.

 

[Corius]

There's two solutions I like. One is based around LUT profiles, and the other is Lightroom presets. Neither however are cheap!

Profiles & Styles – The Archetype Process

Mastin Labs – Presets and LUTs Born From Film

As mentioned elsewhere in this thread. It's worth remembering that there's different interpretations of what a specific negative film looks like. It depends how the film is processed and scanned. As such, The Archetype Process profiles emulates different scanners and their settings, and Mastin is all based on the Frontier scanner and offers a "toolbox" that emulates various settings on that scanner.

Thanks for the suggestion to look at Mastin Labs. I've just bought a couple of the packs and although they are expensive they do give very good results very easily. The simple workflow they recommend makes it easy to get a great photo!

 

[Ronnie99]

There's two solutions I like. One is based around LUT profiles, and the other is Lightroom presets. Neither however are cheap!

Profiles & Styles – The Archetype Process

Mastin Labs – Presets and LUTs Born From Film

As mentioned elsewhere in this thread. It's worth remembering that there's different interpretations of what a specific negative film looks like. It depends how the film is processed and scanned. As such, The Archetype Process profiles emulates different scanners and their settings, and Mastin is all based on the Frontier scanner and offers a "toolbox" that emulates various settings on that scanner.

Thanks for the suggestion to look at Mastin Labs. I've just bought a couple of the packs and although they are expensive they do give very good results very easily. The simple workflow they recommend makes it easy to get a great photo!

Glad to hear. What packs did you buy?

 

[Corius]

There's two solutions I like. One is based around LUT profiles, and the other is Lightroom presets. Neither however are cheap!

Profiles & Styles – The Archetype Process

Mastin Labs – Presets and LUTs Born From Film

As mentioned elsewhere in this thread. It's worth remembering that there's different interpretations of what a specific negative film looks like. It depends how the film is processed and scanned. As such, The Archetype Process profiles emulates different scanners and their settings, and Mastin is all based on the Frontier scanner and offers a "toolbox" that emulates various settings on that scanner.

Thanks for the suggestion to look at Mastin Labs. I've just bought a couple of the packs and although they are expensive they do give very good results very easily. The simple workflow they recommend makes it easy to get a great photo!

Glad to hear. What packs did you buy?

Hi,

I took the "Test" they offer on-line and went for "Portra Original" and "Adventure Everyday"

By coincidence the Portra pack includes Portra 400, and Adventure Everyday includes Tri-X 400. These were the two you originally asked about. Also included is Ektar 100 and it is also really good.

It's certainly worth having a look at the website, but they are expensive.

 

[Acmespaceship]

What editing software are you using now? Does it support color lookup table (LUT) files? There are LUT collections you can purchase and many you can download for free.

Pat David's free film simulation LUTs work great for me. They tend to look overbaked at default settings, but that's why you have an opacity slider. If your software supports .cube or HaldCLUT files you can download them here: https://gmic.eu/color_presets/negative_new_sample_11.html#browse

Scroll down below the sample pictures to where it says "Get the Full Pack" and click either "Download .png HaldCLUT" or" Download .cube" depending on the type of file you need. For example, I downloaded the .cube files and imported them into On1 Photo Raw, where they appear in the LUT effect filter and life is good.

If your software doesn't use LUTs you can probably find a version of G'MIC that works for you. G'MIC is a free and open-source plugin that comes with far more LUTs than any sane person will ever need. It is available for GIMP and as an 8bf plugin for PS, Affinity, PSP, etc. https://gmic.eu/

I am not opposed to paying for software (my credit card bills confirm this) but in this case the open-source option is powerful and fun to play with.

 

[Ronnie99]

What editing software are you using now? Does it support color lookup table (LUT) files? There are LUT collections you can purchase and many you can download for free.

Pat David's free film simulation LUTs work great for me. They tend to look overbaked at default settings, but that's why you have an opacity slider. If your software supports .cube or HaldCLUT files you can download them here: https://gmic.eu/color_presets/negative_new_sample_11.html#browse

Scroll down below the sample pictures to where it says "Get the Full Pack" and click either "Download .png HaldCLUT" or" Download .cube" depending on the type of file you need. For example, I downloaded the .cube files and imported them into On1 Photo Raw, where they appear in the LUT effect filter and life is good.

If your software doesn't use LUTs you can probably find a version of G'MIC that works for you. G'MIC is a free and open-source plugin that comes with far more LUTs than any sane person will ever need. It is available for GIMP and as an 8bf plugin for PS, Affinity, PSP, etc. https://gmic.eu/

I am not opposed to paying for software (my credit card bills confirm this) but in this case the open-source option is powerful and fun to play with.

I use Lightroom and Photoshop. Sorry to say I have no idea what LUT files are.

Thanks for your response

 

[Ronnie99]

There's two solutions I like. One is based around LUT profiles, and the other is Lightroom presets. Neither however are cheap!

Profiles & Styles – The Archetype Process

Mastin Labs – Presets and LUTs Born From Film

As mentioned elsewhere in this thread. It's worth remembering that there's different interpretations of what a specific negative film looks like. It depends how the film is processed and scanned. As such, The Archetype Process profiles emulates different scanners and their settings, and Mastin is all based on the Frontier scanner and offers a "toolbox" that emulates various settings on that scanner.

Thanks for the suggestion to look at Mastin Labs. I've just bought a couple of the packs and although they are expensive they do give very good results very easily. The simple workflow they recommend makes it easy to get a great photo!

Glad to hear. What packs did you buy?

Hi,

I took the "Test" they offer on-line and went for "Portra Original" and "Adventure Everyday"

By coincidence the Portra pack includes Portra 400, and Adventure Everyday includes Tri-X 400. These were the two you originally asked about. Also included is Ektar 100 and it is also really good.

It's certainly worth having a look at the website, but they are expensive.

Thank you. Right now I'm planning on purchasing one pack, but it's hard to choose just one. I'm in between the everyday pack, Portra 400 and the Fuji Original Pack

 

[Greg Edwards]

There's two solutions I like. One is based around LUT profiles, and the other is Lightroom presets. Neither however are cheap!

Profiles & Styles – The Archetype Process

Mastin Labs – Presets and LUTs Born From Film

As mentioned elsewhere in this thread. It's worth remembering that there's different interpretations of what a specific negative film looks like. It depends how the film is processed and scanned. As such, The Archetype Process profiles emulates different scanners and their settings, and Mastin is all based on the Frontier scanner and offers a "toolbox" that emulates various settings on that scanner.

Thanks for the suggestion to look at Mastin Labs. I've just bought a couple of the packs and although they are expensive they do give very good results very easily. The simple workflow they recommend makes it easy to get a great photo!

Glad to hear. What packs did you buy?

Hi,

I took the "Test" they offer on-line and went for "Portra Original" and "Adventure Everyday"

By coincidence the Portra pack includes Portra 400, and Adventure Everyday includes Tri-X 400. These were the two you originally asked about. Also included is Ektar 100 and it is also really good.

It's certainly worth having a look at the website, but they are expensive.

Thank you. Right now I'm planning on purchasing one pack, but it's hard to choose just one. I'm in between the everyday pack, Portra 400 and the Fuji Original Pack

It may be worth your time visiting the mastin labs community group of Facebook. If you can upload a few raw images to Google drive and show, you can and ask people to edit them for you so that you get an idea how the presets will work with your images.
Most of the members are wedding photographers, but you can still get an idea of the looks you can achieve

FWIW I favour the portra and adventure everyday packs. The Fuji original pack has a very particular look that I personally don’t feel is as versatile, although it does beautiful things with portraits!

 

[CAcreeks]

If you shoot Fujifilm the Kodachrome recipe is here.

Here is the one for Tri-X 400 .

Sorry I should have clarified. I shoot on a Canon 6d Mark ii

DxO Film Pack has Tri-X and Portra 160NC, which looks like what you posted.

There were three Portra 400s, 400VC (yuck), 400NC, and 400UC. I shot a lot of the third.

https://www.dxo.com/dxo-filmpack/renderings/

I'm not sure whether you need Elite or Economy edition. Personally, I like the two Kodak and three Fuji color slide film renditions in regular DxO PhotoLab. I hate B&W so I'll shut up now.

P.S. Fuji Reala 100 was a very interesting film with low contrast and high saturation. DxO also has an emulation for it; almost makes me want to spend $85 or $139. I loved it, but the extra 2 stops of 400UC was irresistible.

 

[Regor250]

What editing software are you using now? Does it support color lookup table (LUT) files? There are LUT collections you can purchase and many you can download for free.

Pat David's free film simulation LUTs work great for me. They tend to look overbaked at default settings, but that's why you have an opacity slider. If your software supports .cube or HaldCLUT files you can download them here: https://gmic.eu/color_presets/negative_new_sample_11.html#browse

Scroll down below the sample pictures to where it says "Get the Full Pack" and click either "Download .png HaldCLUT" or" Download .cube" depending on the type of file you need. For example, I downloaded the .cube files and imported them into On1 Photo Raw, where they appear in the LUT effect filter and life is good.

If your software doesn't use LUTs you can probably find a version of G'MIC that works for you. G'MIC is a free and open-source plugin that comes with far more LUTs than any sane person will ever need. It is available for GIMP and as an 8bf plugin for PS, Affinity, PSP, etc. https://gmic.eu/

I am not opposed to paying for software (my credit card bills confirm this) but in this case the open-source option is powerful and fun to play with.

I use Lightroom and Photoshop. Sorry to say I have no idea what LUT files are.

Thanks for your response

LUT = Look Up Table, aka a preset that modifies each color in a specific way to achieve a certain look. Essentially a table containing every colors in a spectrum that describes how to modify them (e.g. increase contrast, desaturate, increase the Red value etc.) It originates from the film industry to automate the processing of each frames quickly and consistently, but is equally applicable to still imagery post processing as a quick and easy way to achieve a given look. You can download tons of LUT definition files for free to emulate traditional film look and feel. You store them in a given location where you PP software can find them, select and apply a desired look LUT file et voila, done, instant film emulation.

--
Roger

 

[Greg Edwards]

Just to throw a potential spanner in the works, I received an email at the weekend telling me that mastin are releasing a new pack later today. All of their presets to date have been based on negative film, but the new one is a "slide" pack, with emulations of provia, velvia and ektachrome.

Might be worth a look before committing to anything yet.

 

[Ronnie99]

Just to throw a potential spanner in the works, I received an email at the weekend telling me that mastin are releasing a new pack later today. All of their presets to date have been based on negative film, but the new one is a "slide" pack, with emulations of provia, velvia and ektachrome.

Might be worth a look before committing to anything yet.

Great, thanks for the heads up. When I was using the DXO film pack trial version I really likes the look of Ektachrome.

I'm new to this though. Can you tell me the difference between simulations based on negative film, and a slide pack?

Thank you

 

[Greg Edwards]

Just to throw a potential spanner in the works, I received an email at the weekend telling me that mastin are releasing a new pack later today. All of their presets to date have been based on negative film, but the new one is a "slide" pack, with emulations of provia, velvia and ektachrome.

Might be worth a look before committing to anything yet.

Great, thanks for the heads up. When I was using the DXO film pack trial version I really likes the look of Ektachrome.

I'm new to this though. Can you tell me the difference between simulations based on negative film, and a slide pack?

Thank you

I'm not an expert in this field, sorry. I know what I like, and like what I know! As far as simulations go, all I know is different film stocks have different characteristics which will be reflected in the simulations - much like any other film simulation.

However, the big difference is a subjective one. With physical, negative film, you need to scan it and reverse it to find out what it really looks like. The end result can differ depending on the scanner used and the processing. Slides are easier to scan as you always have a colour reference. Just look at the original slide and you know how the scan should look.

Regarding shooting with real slide film, I know it's less forgiving to shoot with and that negative film handles highlights better. Mastin's film presets include this highlight protection feature, perhaps their slide emulation will treat highlights as they would with the real thing. I guess we'll find out when they're released. Slide film is also less grainy, I assume the Mastin presets will also have emulations of this in the toolbox as they usually do for other preset packs.

All I can suggest is to look up the slide films I mentioned and see how they compare to other film stocks.

 

[Ronnie99]

Just to throw a potential spanner in the works, I received an email at the weekend telling me that mastin are releasing a new pack later today. All of their presets to date have been based on negative film, but the new one is a "slide" pack, with emulations of provia, velvia and ektachrome.

Might be worth a look before committing to anything yet.

Great, thanks for the heads up. When I was using the DXO film pack trial version I really likes the look of Ektachrome.

I'm new to this though. Can you tell me the difference between simulations based on negative film, and a slide pack?

Thank you

I'm not an expert in this field, sorry. I know what I like, and like what I know! As far as simulations go, all I know is different film stocks have different characteristics which will be reflected in the simulations - much like any other film simulation.

However, the big difference is a subjective one. With physical, negative film, you need to scan it and reverse it to find out what it really looks like. The end result can differ depending on the scanner used and the processing. Slides are easier to scan as you always have a colour reference. Just look at the original slide and you know how the scan should look.

Regarding shooting with real slide film, I know it's less forgiving to shoot with and that negative film handles highlights better. Mastin's film presets include this highlight protection feature, perhaps their slide emulation will treat highlights as they would with the real thing. I guess we'll find out when they're released. Slide film is also less grainy, I assume the Mastin presets will also have emulations of this in the toolbox as they usually do for other preset packs.

All I can suggest is to look up the slide films I mentioned and see how they compare to other film stocks.

Thanks so much. I really appreciate it