Ektachrome 64 EPR/experiences

[vapparn]

Dear slide shooters, I would like to hear your experinces with Kodak

Ektachrome 64 EPR. I know that EPR is old emulsion, but classic one.

 

This far I've been experimenting mainly with Ektachrome 100G EPN and

some 100VS&100GX. These films are nice, but I have never liked them

as I have liked Kodachrome 64.

 

I shoot: people/outdoors/hand held/120/flash fill or as main/"street

with fashion". -So, skin tones are essential.

 

What are the things that I should know when I start to play with EPR?

I guess it is not the easiest film to play around.

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Mikko

[wickedmartini]

EPR is definitely one of Kodak's older emulsions. It's known for it's stronger greens and blues and used to be quite popular with commercial shooters. During my days as a rep with Kodak this film was huge with commercial furniture photographers. Flesh tones are good though image structure would not be the best that you could get at this point in time. Kodachrome is a tough film to replace. If you are looking for a film with good saturation and fleshtone reprodcution I might look at films like Kodak's EPP or the newer 100 speed T-Grain emulsions. I use a lot of Fuji's Provia and find it is a very well balanced film. EPR would probably be one of my last choices if I were looking to replace Kodachrome. I hope that helps. Have fun!

[thomas_dannhauser]

I'm reluctant to directly compare EPR to K-64 as the overall "look" of the two films is quite different. However, EPR and EPP were considered to have some of the best skin tones available on E-6 films in the late 80s - mid 90s. EPR had a bit more contrast and saturation than the EPP (and significantly more than EPN), so which you preferred was a matter of personal taste. I recall visiting with one of the photographers at Playboy as part of a customer interview in the late 90's -- film of choice was EPR specifically for skin tones (not too surprising). Compared to modern films, EPR's grain and sharpness will be disadvantaged, but your use of 120-format will help minimize this (compared to 35mm). I can't comment about your impression of EPR as "not the easiest film to play around".... while you can't push it to the same extent as more modern films, part of the reason it had such a strong following with professional photographers was its reproducibility and consistency. Perhaps Dan Sapper can comment further on this....

[vapparn]

Thanks for the answers. Maybe I should have been a bit more specific: I'm not trying to replace Kodachrome, just trying to find alternatives to new Ekta 100 stocks.

[r.t. dowling]

It's a nice film. WAY overpriced at this point in time, unfortunately, but try a roll and see how you like it.

[steve_swinehart]

I'd be really surpised if you think EPR has better skin tones than 100G. While EPR was "one of the best in the '90s" - I don't think it's nearly as good as 100G for being neutral and making good skin tones. Kodachrome 64 really doesn't make accurate skin tones, that's the part that I don't get in your post. What are you looking for in skin tone reproduction?

 

Try some Provia F 100 with an 81A filter - it may give you the look you want. Not neutral, but it does approximate a Kodachrome look.

[oskar_ojala]

EPR is good for product photography and similar, but not really people, the palette and contrast isn't good for people. I think EPR is nice, but it's overpriced and now there are more modern alternatives. It's not hard to use, but it's a slow slide film and has fairly much contrast. Kodachrome has a look of its own.

[vapparn]

Stewe S., About K64 skin tones... I don't have a computer or scanner, I can only give you this:

 

http://www.photographyreview.com/Slide,Film/Kodak/PRD_83326_3118crx.aspx#reviews

[steve_swinehart]

Whoever wrote that review must be able to rationalize things like "jumbo shrimp" if they can rationalize "a look of it's own" and "natural color." Kodachrome does have a look of it's own, it's distinct color palette, and it's NOT "natural color."

 

Having about 10,000 or so frames of it at home as compared to a number of E6 films over the past 30 years, I think I'm just as qualified as whoever wrote that review to make the statement, "Kodachrome does not make accurate skin tones." Many people find the rendering to their liking (fine) but, let's not operate under the assumption that Kodachrome is the comparison for color accuracy.

 

If you like the Kodachrome look that's fine. But, please don't try and pass off Kodachrome as making "natual color" or accurate skin tones. It doesn't do that, and never has.

 

Every film has a certain look. Of the current films, E100G comes the closest (and probably Astia) to producing accurate color.

[berk_sirman2]

I guess longevity is an issue with older technology E6 films, right? Then this film may start fading much sooner than the newer Fuji/Kodak emulsions. I have no relevant solid data/test to back this up. Nevertheless you may want to look into it if longevity is something you consider while deciding what film to use.

 

I came across this film quite recently, it was dated 12/2004 but had been kept refrigirated. Price was reasonable (between Sensia and Provia) When I go to that photo store again, I will buy a roll and give it a try.

[wickedmartini]

"Thanks for the answers. Maybe I should have been a bit more specific: I'm not trying to replace Kodachrome, just trying to find alternatives to new Ekta 100 stocks."

 

Check out the new Velvia 100F. I like Astia for fashion work. It's a softer film with great flesh reproduction and tight grain.

[donnie_strickland]

Ektachrome 64 skin tones<div></div>

[georg_kern]

EPR has turned the skin of the baby into something that almost looks like plastic. Really a bad film.

[sonous]

EPR is a very nice film, IMHO. In fact, it's one of my favorites. Unfortunately at the present

time it's quite expensive, especially in 35mm, where it costs twice as much per roll as the

more modern E100G/GX. 120 is more reasonably priced in comparison. I'm really not a fan

of EPP, in almost any situation I'd rather use EPR. I think someone above said that EPR

doesn't do well with skin tones. I have to wonder if that person has really used the film for

shooting people, since I find the skin tones to be quite good as is typical of most

Ektachrome films.

 

I've found the latitude of EPR to be *very* narrow, tending to blow highlights with the

slightest overexposure, but it does really well at 64ISO. It also seems to be sensitive to the

processing chemistry, with colours being a bit off when processed in Fuji chemistry. When

processed in Kodak chemistry, colours are pretty accurate (relatively speaking; if you want

maximum accuracy then shoot EPN) and just on the cooler side of neutral. I'm also a big

fan of Kodachrome, but sadly I don't think anything will truly replace it. EPR does have

some similarities, is sharp, does well with people/skin, and is moderately slow. However,

nothing will be quite as sharp as Kodachrome, EPR isn't as warm, and the "look" isn't quite

the same.

 

Try a few rolls of EPR rated spot-on at 64, and see how you like it. Ultimately, that's the

only test that really matters.

[donnie_strickland]

Georg --

 

 

The baby IS plastic. Does that mean EPR is still bad? :)

[leeblackman]

I wish Kodachrome wasn't so expensive. I have a friend who has given me a few rolls of PKR. I think its short or slightly expired, don't know, but I really hear good things about the K14 processed film. I've seen some really old Kodachrome slides from the late 60's, on a light board thru an eye loop. I was amazed at the quality, though I didn't have anything else to compare by at the time.

[r.t. dowling]

Lee,

 

Bear in mind that the Kodachrome from the '60s is very different from the Kodachrome film and processing available today. If you shoot today's Kodachrome and expect it to look like those slides from the '60s, you may be disappointed.

[jason_fitzmaurice]

I love EPR, but unless you find a great deal on it it is pretty expensive. You might try Agfa RSXII 100 or 200. Actually i find the 200 looks a lot like EPR. Same medium contrast, edium saturation look, and exactly the same amount of grain.

[daniel_fortier]

For EPR lovers, I just put some USA EPR 135-36 DEC 2005 on ebay VERY CHEAP.

 

just search for EPR 135

 

I have a bit more,

regards