Rec. film for fall colors - Astia, Ektar, etc.

[lahuasteca]

<p>I decided to take my trusty FE2 along with my D80 as I head north in Oct. for my annual fall color shoot in PA and WV. I need some recommendations for film. My favorite shooting conditions are dawn or dusk, misty sky or drizzle and waterfalls under forest canopy. 400UC gave me very good results the last time I used film, but it no longer is available. I have Astia 100F, several years old, but in the freezer. I have never used Ektar 100, a lot of people recommend it, but the images I see on Flickr seem to show some sort of color cast under the conditions I describe. 400VC? I have some frozen Velvia 100, but I'd rather not use it as in the past I've had a hard time scanning it. So my choices seem to be Astia 100F, Ektar 100, and 400VC. I'd be interested in comments on each for the conditions I describe.<br /><br />Thanks.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>Anything strong on colors - if you don't like Velvia (it does have its limits) try E100G or E100VS, Ektar, Portra VC or Reala if you can find it. My iPhone wallpaper is some fall leaves shot on E100 and scanned on my old Minolta III and the colors came out great.</p>

<p>I think Ektar is getting underserved bad press because of a misunderstanding of its color handling. Ektar color casts are usually due to not scanning and processing carefully enough. The tendency is to misunderestimate the corrections needed in post, because Ektar 100 is a variant on Vision cine film and it's designed from the ground up for scanning, so the emulsion is intended for more of an "accurate" reproduction than film users are used to. Things like blue from the sky on a sunny day are not corrected by the film but are very easily handled (even auto levels per channel or auto WB is usually enough). A lot of scanner software assumes a more traditional color interpretation from C41 film and the users don't always know they're meant to do post work, or they think that doing post work is impure or something. Some of my best color film shots come from Ektar scans.</p>

<p>Or use Astia :)</p>

[lahuasteca]

<p>Les,</p>

<p>The recession hit hard last year, so no trip in Fall, 2009, and nearby Mexico is now off-limits. So, with a hiatus of a year, some films have disappeared. I will finally get around to using Astia 100f this Fall, but I would like to use a print film, also, either Ektar or 400VC. I really like 400UC<br>

.</p>

[lahuasteca]

<p>Andrew and Les,</p>

<p>Thanks for the responses. I have a Coolscan V and just installed Vuescan on my laptop. I have found a way in Photoshop (right click before opening) which gives an option to open in Camera RAW. This enables changing white balance on the file, even if it is not a digital RAW. Given that, I'm going to try Ektar. I think you a right, a lot of the images I'm seeing on flickr are probably inexpensive scans that came with the film processing. I'll take the rolls of Astia that I already have, but prefer film because I can get it developed locally. I'll have Ektar and the Gold 100 (it looks very good, Les) shipped directly to Pittsburgh, then have it developed before I return to Texas.<br>

The economy health (or lack of it) is one big reason no new fancy D700 Nikon for me. Also, I just find it much easier, lighter, and much more fun using the un-complicated manual focus Nikon for this type of travel.</p>

<p>Gene</p>

 

[eddy_d]

<p>I have used Ektar for fall colors and nature in general and it is a great film. I have no complaints with it. It is very saturated in my opinion and I like it. The UC films were all hype to me. I never got the rich colors from any of the UC films as I do with Ektar. I still have 2 rolls of UC left. Go with Ektar as far as print film.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>I have so far used Ektar 100 only once, and it did have strong blues in some shadow areas, for whatever reason. Otherwise, it really is sharp and handles reds and oranges nicely, so I would think it is worth a try, anyhow.</p>

<p>I confess that I find all the films better than they used to be. You'd know they'd get it right just as film is getting hard to find in your local stores.</p>

<p> </p>

[andylynn]

<p>For use in Adobe Camera Raw, Vuescan can scan as a 16-bit .DNG file - very useful, but very large file, so best to deal with it an convert it quickly.</p>

<p>JDM, I find the same thing you do about the film - even the Fuji consumer grade film you see everywhere, the grain and detail are as good as film a stop or two slower used to be, the 200 is freakin' fantastic. I've got scans I have to stare at for 5 minutes to decide whether they were shot on Superia 200 or Reala. You can get a good image from 1600 film! And that Kodak 500T cine film is off the hook. These chemists are no slouches.</p>

[john_shriver]

<p>Ektar 100 and Ektachrome E100G both do the same thing in open shade -- go blue. It's reality, because it's lit by blue sky, not white sun. It's just that the auto-white-balance in our brains ignores it. Neutral films don't. Solution -- correction in post-processing or an 81A warming filter.<br>

That said, when they updated the profiles in SilverFast to include Ektar 100, it because easier to get well color-balanced scans.</p>

[randall_pukalo]

<p>If you liked 400UC (as I did), 400VC is very similar. But for Fall Colors, neither come close to Kodak EBX (Elite Chrome Extra Color) which you can still get from Adorama. It is basically E100VS, but corrected so that there is no need for warming filters in the shade or on overcast days. It is perfect for fall Colors, which I have been using it for the last 3 years or so. Pick up a few rolls, it is not expensive either.<br>

Ektar 100 - avoid it for Fall Colors, unless you want to use warming filters and post scan color corrections. It does pick up blue casts very easy, and is difficult to get good results straight out of the scanner. I shot it the firts year it came out, local fall colors and my kids, and it had a terriv\ble blue cast due to the heavy overcast conditions I shot in. My Minolta 5400 had a very hard time getting good colors from it, so I had it rescanned ona $25,000 Noritsu, which properly balance the colors. I am surprised Kodak let this one go as is, given most users are home scanning now. I will note though, that it does incredible sunsets! It also has decent skin tones for a saturated film.</p>

[randall_pukalo]

<p><img src=" alt="" />Provia 400X is also good, and the speed allows hand holding in dim conditions. Saturated, but not the WOW effect you will get from EBX or Velvia.</p>

<p>

[randall_pukalo]

<p>resub</p>

<div></div>

[JDMvW]

<p>As a son and brother and uncle of artists who paint, I am aware that shadows are really blue and other colors too. I learned this a my father's knee when he was trying to show me how to paint.<br>

Still, the Ektar went a little farther than most films do in picking that up and maybe even intensifying it a little. Still, I will use Ektar again, and the problem is not difficult to solve in post-processing in the cases where it does stand out a little too much, as you say.</p>

<p>I'm the black sheep in a family of artists; I became a critic ;)<br>

Dad also tried to teach me how to fish, and I also don't do much fishing either. :(</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Here's an example of what I mean on a bronze statue of a CCC worker - photographed with a Canon EOS 5 camera with Ektar 100. Note also that the bronze in the sun and shadow not exposed directly to the sky is done very well. Scanned on a Canoscan FS4000 using the then latest version of VueScan.</p><div></div>

[charles_ma]

<p>JDM,<br /> The blue cast in your Ektar 100 photo could be easily corrected by Colorperfect photoshop plug-in.</p>

<p>http://www.c-f-systems.com/Plug-ins.html</p>

<p>I hope you don't mind I made a change to your photo to illustrate the effect of Colorperfect. I made a quick adjustment in Colorperfect (about 15 seconds), here is what I get. I have found that Colorperfect plug-in made getting great color and contrast from negative film so much easier. It is the primary reason why I started using color negative this year (i shot primarily slides in the past).</p><div></div>

[mich8261]

<p>what about Kodachrome? You only have a few months left to use it.</p>

[Ian Taylor]

<p><a href="../photo/1182030&size=lg">Velvia is nice </a>if the light isn't too contrasty.<br>

Otherwise VC is great.</p>

[lahuasteca]

<p>Hi all,<br>

Thanks for so many responses. I'm going to use Astia 100f because I have experience with it. I will try Ektar, especially knowing, thanks to Andrew's tip, that I can scan and save directly as a .DNG. Whatever color cast exists can be easily dealt with. The Kodak Elite Chrome Extra sounds really tempting. Are there any problems with shadows blocking and/or limited dynamic range?<br>

I'm really looking forward to getting into the PA/WV woods with the lightweight FE2 and prime lenses. </p>

<p>Gene, in very sunny and hot South Texas</p>

<p> </p>

[eddy_d]

<p>Ian. Great shot. Very saturated and looks almost surreal.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>As I already said in my post, it <em>can</em> be fixed. My point was that the film does do this.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Still, I will use Ektar again, and the problem is not difficult to solve in post-processing in the cases where it does stand out a little too much, as you say.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Frankly, the "fix" above is still plenty blue, for that matter.</p>

<blockquote></blockquote>

[rickbehl]

<p>This a question that I was meaning to ask myself as I am hopefully planning to be in Japan for their autumnal colours. Usually for landscape/nature I shoot Velvia 50, Velvia 100 and Provia 100F. And like the original poster I try and do most of my shooting during the 'magic hours'... I've recently tried a roll of Kodak Ektachrome 100VS and the colours came out pretty nice. It seems there is a slight hint of magenta/yellow in the transparencies on a light table (compared side by side to Velvia) so I'm thinking that it might pick up the autumn/fall colours possibly better than Velvia which is usually great for green landscapes/blue skies...<br>

Any comments on that ?</p>

<p>Rgds<br>

Rick</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Different films from different places have different characteristics. Like a national coffee blend, it may have different "emphases" depending on its target market. SP had sent me some Fuji ProPlus CN film made in India, and he had found out there that it was colored so as to enhance more brownish skin tones. Remember how the old Kodachrome was meant to make every person of European descent look "rosy"?</p>

<p>The early Fuji slide film I used to shoot when it first came into the American market, had a very decided pink to purple cast. More recently, I haven't seen that in Fuji color negative film made for the American market. My guess is that many films may be engineered for specific markets. I know that older Agfa slide film always made me look blonde and blue eyed. ;)</p>

<p>I got sidetracked and left off my main point, which was that there are good reasons to carry a "palette" of different color films for different kinds of subjects and colors.</p>

[tony_duda]

<p>Here's one "off the wall" choice...Ferrania. Their print films are awesome for fall colors because they've always emphasized and exaggerated the warm golden, orange, brown and red earth tones. It's the first print film I grab when shooting Fall foliage, pumpkins and everything that goes along with the season. I've stocked-up and have some in the freezer, ready for October! I'd suggest their Solaris FG Plus 100 print film, as it's the least grainy, sharpest and most saturated of the line. As for a slide film, I'd also suggest Kodak Ektachrome Extra Color for the same reasons. Both of these films can be somewhat hard to find. Ferrania is sometimes available as a "house brand", just look for "Made in Italy" somewhere on the package, or it's sold under Ferrania's own Solaris brand by some merchants on Ebay. As someone said earlier, Ektachrome Extra Color can be purchased from Adorama, but for some strange reason most of the other mail order suppliers don't carry it.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>You can get Ferrania, cheap, here: http://www.fourcornerstore.com/collections/frontpage/products/four-corner-color-film-9-pack-100asa</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Some of the Walgreen's film I have bought has turned out to be Ferrania. Seems to work surprisingly well, but the souce that Andrew posted is cheaper still.</p>

[david_henderson]

<p>Les, I hope the top one is Velvia, though I think it looks a little underexposed looking at the whites - which may be a function of different cameras since the settings were the same. Certainly if I adjust the white simply by eye the top picture seems to generate more of the colours I expect to see from RVP in sun. I think there's maybe 0.75-1 stop difference between the shots. </p>

<p>The bottom one I think is gruesome, so I hope thats Ektar! Certainly its not a pallette I'm used to seeing in my stuff.</p>

<p>Going back to the OP, I can't quite follow the logic of hunting out great colour and then using a film that will be inclined to mute it. Just sounds like a recipe for a lot of photoshop work to me, though that makes an assumption that perhaps I shouldn't make, that the appearance of the original slide doesn't much matter to him.</p>

<p>Personally I've tended to travel in autumn with A Velvia or two ( 50 and 100 give different colours to greens and reds) with some Provia 100F/400 for when conditions are too contrasty or I really need the extra speed in the wind. But then I can keep three films loaded all the time. The photograph attached is Velvia 50 under a light canopy with no direct sun and probably (since its Scotland) after recent rain. </p>

<p> </p><div></div>