# Making digital look like Kodak Portra NC



## wishbone_17

I was curious to know if anyone can show me steps how to make my digital images look more like Kodak Portra NC. I am trying to learn different Photoshop techniques as I learn the program and this is one of the techniques I am really interested in. 


Also, can someone tell me how to get that vignette look to my images using Photoshop? Or maybe direct me to a website that has tutorials that cover this kind of stuff (I have already watched U Suck @ Photoshop).

Thanks.


----------



## reg

Interesting in buying a plugin?

Check out Alien Skin's "Exposure" plugin.


----------



## davebmck

U Suck at Photoshop is a satire.  It is not a real tutorial.


----------



## Joves

Actually you might look at Ken Rockwells site. While I hate his opinons on cameras and, other various things. He does know photoshop and, has some tutorials on there. 
Disclaimer: Photoshop is the only thing I will ever suggest going to Rockwells site.


----------



## wishbone_17

Reg - Is the Exposure Plugin a whole other program or something that you use through Photoshop (like a filter for certain film looks)?

Davebmck - I know You Suck at Photoshop is a satire but it is also really informative people who are learning Photoshop.

Joves - I will check out his site. Thanks for the heads up. 


Are there anyother tutorials for this type of thing on the internet? I can only assume there are, I just don't know where to look. I don't mind buying a program to do the work but I would much rather learn how to do it myself so I can fine tune it. 

Thanks for the feedback.


----------



## Alpha

Portra NC is not a film you could easily match digitally, especially since its dynamic range is likely wider than your sensor. Granted, it would probably be possible to nail it down to something of a science but it would require a lot of side-by-sides and if I were doing it personally I wouldn't be doing it in RGB.

For the record I think Alien Skin's "exposure" is total quackery. Converted images look nothing like the stated films in my opinion.


----------



## epatsellis

well for less than $50, you can buy a film camera and a few rolls....


----------



## wishbone_17

I have 7 film cameras and shoot on them regularly. I shoot digital when I need to keep costs down for specific jobs. I am also opposed (at the moment) to buying a program because I would rather learn more about Photoshop through this lesson rather than how to click a button in Photoshop. 

As for Portra NC..... It doesn't have to be exactly like Portra NC, I am just looking for a lesson on how to make the images more natural looking in color. 

Below is a link to a photographer who regularly shoots digital but her work looks more natural than that. The tones are almost muted. Much like the look Portra NC gives.

The link is: 

http://www.elizabethweinberg.com/

I am trying to find a way for my work to look more like hers. 

I understand that a lot has to do with time of day, clothing, season, etc, but even her "summer" shots are still very muted.

Thanks.


----------



## Hawaii Five-O

I've always wanted to shoot with porta film, but I haven't yet heh.


----------



## Josh66

C677T said:


> I've always wanted to shoot with porta film, but I haven't yet heh.


Why not?


----------



## ksmattfish

I find most DSLRs standard settings are more saturated and contrasty than color print film.  Either tone them down in the jpeg parameter settings, or shoot raw and process by inspection.


----------



## usayit

People who shot with Kodak MAX don't ask how to make their prints look more like Portra NC.  They simply switch negative and shoot with Portra NC.  It is no different now that we have DSLRs..... digital is just another medium...  

On that token... You can get into the ballpark easier with adjustments in Adobe Lightroom.  In photoshop, have you tried just decreasing contrast and saturation?


----------



## ksmattfish

usayit said:


> People who shot with Kodak MAX don't ask how to make their prints look more like Portra NC.  They simply switch negative and shoot with Portra NC.  It is no different now that we have DSLRs..... digital is just another medium...



The reason they have to switch is that C41 processing is standardized, and custom processing usually isn't an option.  With digital custom processing is always an option.


----------



## Hawaii Five-O

O|||||||O said:


> Why not?



Well part of the reason for not using it is I thought it would be expensive to develop. And usually when I did think of trying it, I saw some other film I would rather try hah. One of these days soon i'll try it though, along with the Ektachromes, and Velvias.


----------



## Josh66

C677T said:
			
		

> Well part of the reason for not using it is I thought it would be expensive to develop. And usually when I did think of trying it, I saw some other film I would rather try hah. One of these days soon i'll try it though, along with the Ektachromes, and Velvias.



I have a bunch of Portra 160 VC in the freezer, shot a few rolls - haven't developed it yet (I'm broke...lol).


----------



## wishbone_17

usayit said:


> People who shot with Kodak MAX don't ask how to make their prints look more like Portra NC.  They simply switch negative and shoot with Portra NC.  It is no different now that we have DSLRs..... digital is just another medium...
> 
> On that token... You can get into the ballpark easier with adjustments in Adobe Lightroom.  In photoshop, have you tried just decreasing contrast and saturation?



Yeah I have and it works well. There are obviously no magic settings that get it right all the time, I am just trying to find out if someone has a certain process they go through each time to get a consistent look. I am learning the finer points of photo retouching in Photoshop (the guy I used forever is doing it anymore....time to save money and teach myself) and thought someone might have some insight.


----------



## usayit

ksmattfish said:


> The reason they have to switch is that C41 processing is standardized, and custom processing usually isn't an option.  With digital custom processing is always an option.



But thats my point.... digital custom processing is an option which means it is a medium itself unlike C41 standardized.  Why get hung up on simulating film on digital when digital is capable of producing its own "look".

Experiment and research to find how to make digital work to your liking.... its a far better approach than spending effort copying another film type that can easily be obtain by simply shooting film.

With that said... I've been experimenting with Lightroom 2 for a couple of weeks now.  It is a far better tool to produce a final digital print of your own creation than photoshop (from the stand point of a photographer).


----------



## wishbone_17

I see what you are saying but honestly the only reason I shoot digital at all is the cost effective nature of it. And instant gratification of seeing what the image looks like....but my point is, I don't like the "look" of digital. I want something with more personality. Every film stock has its own personality that makes it unique. To me, Digital is Digital. Canon may read colors differently than Nikon and so on but in the end there is no personality to me because it is all just a bunch of pixels. 

But if I can find a way to get my images to look more like the films I love then I can warm up to it more.


----------



## usayit

Understood... 

Have you tried Lightroom 2?  Its a lot easier to experiment with digital photos to obtain different "looks" than Photoshop.  For manipulation and creation of images stick with photoshop but for "processing" digital photos, try lightroom 2.  there is a demo available for free.

Try
1) increasing clarity
2) increasing vibrance
3) decrease saturation and contrast.
4) bright colors that still exist can be toned by adjusting luminance of that color.

That should get you closer to what you want.


----------



## wishbone_17

I am actually an Aperture2 User, but I am pretty sure I can do all those things in Aperture too. I will check out. Thanks.


----------



## Bifurcator

Yeah Aperture can do those things. A few of those steps are the exact opposite of what Portra NC simulators do tho so I think they may be wrong for exactly Portra. <shrug> 

The Film simulator I use (even tho you said you don't want button automation) is called RealGrain. And in spite of it's name does a total simulation - not just grain. It has a bunch of color films and a bunch or B/W films built in and you can download more I hear. This kind of "button automation is just a set of presets on the sliders. You can use it as a starting position and modify it or you can accept it as it is.







___________




Color Films____________________________________________B/W Films​


It's very good! I got it in a bundle with Portraiture and Noiseware Professional for like $150 on an educator discount thing. I have several other simulators but they don't do as good a job and pale in comparison really.


----------



## Hawaii Five-O

Bifurcator said:


> The Film simulator I use (even tho you said you don't want button automation) is called RealGrain. .



Wow that program cost $99. For that price you might as well buy an old canon or something  for $50 and buy $50 of film haha


----------



## epatsellis

ksmattfish said:


> The reason they have to switch is that C41 processing is standardized, and custom processing usually isn't an option.  With digital custom processing is always an option.



I guess so, if you rely on others, but for well under $100, you can process C41 in your kitchen sink, push, pull and cross process to your hearts content. Eventually you realize how much fun you're having making pictures, and somehow end up with an automated processor in your kitchen as well, then it starts to get interesting...


----------



## rom4n301

davebmck said:


> U Suck at Photoshop is a satire.  It is not a real tutorial.




u fo real???????? u suck at photoshop helped me out so much and plus its funny


----------



## Josh66

LOL, you suck at photoshop is awesome!  Maybe it's not as helpful as some other tutorials, but it's a lot more fun to watch.


----------



## rom4n301

lol yea.. he always has that dood poppin up askin him to play some game and he photoshops out the wring on his wifes hand


----------



## JerryPH

Joves said:


> Disclaimer: Photoshop is the only thing I will ever suggest going to Rockwells site.



I almost had a 2nd opinion of you there my friend!


----------



## Early

O|||||||O said:


> I have a bunch of Portra 160 VC in the freezer, shot a few rolls - haven't developed it yet (I'm broke...lol).


Ouch, friend!  Beg, borrow, or steal!  Those undeveloped rolls are sitting there collecting color crossover.


----------



## Bifurcator

C677T said:


> Wow that program cost $99. For that price you might as well buy an old canon or something  for $50 and buy $50 of film haha



:rollseyes: 

$99 is pretty cheap for that plug-in I think. Remember time is money!


----------



## snowalker

Ken Rockwells has nice tips. It worth!


----------



## Josh66

Early said:


> Ouch, friend!  Beg, borrow, or steal!  Those undeveloped rolls are sitting there collecting color crossover.


The undeveloped rolls are in the fridge (unexposed rolls are in the freezer), will that help prevent color crossover?


----------



## Hawaii Five-O

Bifurcator said:


> :rollseyes:
> 
> $99 is pretty cheap for that plug-in I think. Remember time is money!




Not really, you might as well do the real deal, it just seem silly to spend $100 for same effect a $8 roll of film does. But oh well.



I guess i'm just  more of a purist


----------



## bhop

If you have a film scanner, you can get your film developed only (no prints) for around 3 bucks at any 1hr photo lab (at least in L.A.) and scan 'em yourself.  That's what I do anyway..


----------



## malana-lars

i've been trying to accomplish something like it with lightroom.
here are some results:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/malana-lars/1387228035/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/malana-lars/1373191061/


----------

