Portra 160, is it for you?
Kodak Portra 160 has always had a bit of a reputation for being the 'clean' and 'professional' choice in the Portra lineup. It's often praised for its fine grain, soft colours, and beautiful skin tones, making it a go-to for portrait photographers and those shooting in controlled light. Having now shot Portra 400 & 800 I decided to try it myself. After shooting a roll up in the Lake District I am not sure if it would be a go to film stock for me.
Think I just missed focus slightly here, but I am wondering if I should have really shot this on a tripod at a high aperture, live and learn I guess.
I’m much more at home with Portra 400. I love the flexibility it gives, especially when shooting outdoors where the light can be a bit unpredictable. The colours of Portra 400 also feel a bit more vivid and forgiving, whereas Portra 160, at least in my experience, demanded a bit more precision.
One of my main worries going into this was the ISO 160 speed. I’d shot a few rolls of Ektar 100 in the past and found the lower ISO quite limiting — particularly when the weather wasn’t playing ball. I thought I'd have the same issues here, but to my surprise, it wasn't as much of a problem as I expected. As long as I was a little more mindful of the light and exposure, it handled the conditions reasonably well. Still, it’s not a film I’d instinctively reach for unless I knew I had plenty of good, consistent light, definitely not a go to in England
Coffee Shop:
I had more luck indoors with Portra 160 than outdoors, I think knowing the limitations of the ISO I was being more careful indoors.
What really surprised me, though, was where Portra 160 performed best. I went into this thinking it would shine in bright outdoor scenes — soft pastels, clear skies, that sort of thing — but actually, my favourite images ended up being ones I shot indoors. Somehow the softer palette, the fine grain, and the way it handled muted tones and subtle lighting just felt right inside. It produced a really beautiful, almost painterly look that I wasn’t expecting at all.
Coffee Shop 2:
Second shot in a coffee shop that I was really happy with.
That said, while I can appreciate what Portra 160 offers, I’m not sure I’d rush to shoot it again. It feels a little too slow and a little too clinical for the way I like to work. If I’m after a lower ISO film, I’d probably just grab a roll of Kodak Gold 200, which I find bit more flexible and forgiving.
Portra 160 is clearly a beautiful film if you give it the right conditions and a bit of care, and I can see why portrait photographers and studio shooters love it. But for my own shooting style, it just didn’t quite click. Still, it’s always good to try something new — even if it’s just to figure out what you like (and what you don’t).
Just couldn’t get the right results outside.
