Lomography Color Negative 800 ISO 120 3 Pack

Product Information

That did mean that some of the scans could have been exposed a bit differently — especially because I wasn’t scanning the same image from each strip at the same time. (that kind of testing may come later, but with my current setup, I’d be much more likely to make mistakes). Because of this versatility, I’ve shot Kodak Portra 800 in a fairly wide range of shooting circumstances. I’ve also over and underexposed it a little bit, just to see how well it would respond. So rather than harp on too much more about the film generally, I thought I’d show some specific examples with a few thoughts around them. My first roll For quite a long time I used Kodak Portra or Fujifilm Pro 400H before discovering Lomo 400 and 800 films. I was surprised by the rather low price and I suspected the films to be of rather low quality but I still gave it a try and I did not regret it. For quite a long time I compared my results with the Portra and the Lomo and I was able to determine that: 1.) the Lomography film is more interesting regarding the price but also that 2.) I preferred the way it looks. The Lomo 400 and 800 gives pictures with good saturation and a real 'analogue look', I don't have the intrigue to take digital photos when shooting with them.

Importantly, at least as far as my workflow goes, I didn’t find myself needing to correct colour-shifts much between frames, which to me was a good sign that Portra 800 could hold up to at least a bit of variance in exposure within my workflow without it causing me a headache in the scan and in post. This is something I really like about Portra 400, but for one reason or another, I didn’t expect I’d get the same consistency from Porta 800, which is an older emulsion. More image comparisons from shooting Lomo 800 and Portra 800 side by side. I personally see very small differences between these negatives. There are no differences that can’t be e xplained by slight variations in temperature, agitation, or the brightness of the film scan between these rolls. Are there any differences between the images after scanning? Lomography is an important player in the world of analogue photography because the brand continues to bring new tools on the market to keep this practice alive."

The grain really comes out when metering at box speed (aka the manufacturer’s recommendation, in this case, 800) and when shooting in low light – but is still manageable and not overbearing. Many photographers like to meter Lomo 800 1-2 stops overexposed at 640 or 400 as well, which reduces grain in images (just like Portra 800). Photos taken by Matthieu Quatravaux with the Lomography Color Negative 400 ISO 120, pushed 1 stop. Model: @_nynin.

The photos we are showing in this article were taken with Hasselblad 503CX and Mamiya RB67 cameras. Why did you choose the medium format? Images by @30mileswest, @isaacmacieira, @lomographyuk, @memphis.mayne, @kjtcasual, @spiffyphotography, @monimonnni, @bnsmona, @pentax_chris Kodak Portra 800 For my 120 Lomography 800 film test I wanted to give the film a fair chance. I chose two well regarded cameras, first the amazing Fuji GF670 (aka Voightländer Bessa III) and next the maybe less known Fujica GS645 camera. Both are Fuji medium format folding cameras. You take a lot of pictures with the Lomography Color Negative en 400 ISO et 800 ISO films. Why do you like these films? In the photos above, lighting was coming from a ceiling light, so Kelsey’s skin tones came much redder than the photo below with a lot of sunlight shining in.

Industrial Environments (my Favorite Stuff)

I’ve been testing and usingLomography Color Negative 800 on and off for the past few years in a variety of cameras. I can say with all certainty that it’s probably my favorite alternative to CineStill 800T when shooting at night. Let’s begin this review with the positives, because there is, in fact, a lot to like about Lomo 800: The photos were taken on an overcast fall day when the trees were in full bloom. I used a tripod for many of the photos, but most exposures were taken by hand. The colors, saturation, and contrast are remarkably consistent throughout the sets. If the rolls of film were different, there would be clear differences in shadow detail, vibrance, and color temperature like in this comparison between Portra 400 and Lomo 400. But none of those differences are present in these two rolls that were shot side-by-side.

This was one of the most surprising results to me. I did not expect to see that these were exactly the same films. But it makes sense. As a portrait photographer/model photographer my main interest was to photograph people with Lomo 800. This is how I use any film so it was a true test for me and will let me visualise how the film will look when I use it in future. I also shot some non-portrait scenes just to give more variety to my film test. Ilford may make Acros II only for Fujifilm, but in turn, Fuji produces Ilford’s chromogenic XP2 emulsion. Both of these manufacturers benefit from the specialization of the other, but Lomography doesn’t produce anything that Kodak couldn’t do themselves.At the beginning of this post I mentioned that I’ve recently committed to only shooting Kodak Ektachrome E100 and P3200 for at least 6 months to learn how to get the best out of those films. When I mentioned this on social media somewhere, someone commented that I shouldn’t rule out Portra 800. I can’t remember if I commented or not, but I do remember thinking how much I was going to miss this film. I also reflected on how I felt that I’d already learned how to shoot it, scan it and process it; and that it hadn’t taken that many rolls at all! Photos taken by Matthieu Quatravaux with the Lomography Color Negative 800 ISO 120, pushed 1 stop. Model: @cheristyle_. Since shooting these rolls I had been busying myself with getting into the swing of 2018 and I had all but the fuzziest of memories about exactly which roll I shot where and when. I can tell you this however, each roll was fresh and once in my possession they were shot across three consecutive days on my Leica M6 TTL 0.85 with the wonderful 7artisans 50mm f/1.1 lens at ~f/4. I metered all the films at EI 800 so as to level the playing field a bit – some might say giving an unfair advantage to the Fuji. More on that later. No big surprise: In the end, it’s a matter of personal preference, willingness to spend money and the opportunity to get hold of the material. As for me, I will surely shoot Lomography 800 again. Naturally, I tried to guess which was which as best as I could. I even enlisted the help of a few friends to weigh in. I’m happy to say that we were all wrong!