Ektar 100 scanned - blue colour cast

[simonpg]

<p>Recently I shot a number of rolls of Kodak's Ektar 100 (135 format) and FujiChrome Sensia 100 with my XPan. Since the XPan is more of an MF camera. thak anything else I wondered if MF users have had a similar exoerience?<br>

While the Sensia rolls processed and scanned perfectly, my 2 rolls of Ektar resulted in scans where every image on bth rolls resulted in a strong / heavy blue colour cast (not just a blue tone cast, but a deep heavy blue colour cast!)!!.<br>

At first my lab thought the operator had failed to reset the (Fuji Frontier) scanner from E6 to C41 film type, so they rescanned the 2 Ektar rolls. Alas, the same result (TIF files)!<br>

They were both shot in the same camera body with the same lens fitted and NO filter attached. Every fram has the same deep blue colour cast!<br>

Firstly, the Ektar rolls wee C41 processed along with other films that all developed perfectly.<br>

Secondly, the film was new with a very long use-by date. It was stored in a refrigerator since being purchased.<br>

Thirdly, the lab owner knows what he is doing and checked everything possible. He is hand adjusting thenm to get rid of the colour cast because we cannot think of what has gone wrong.<br>

Is it possible I just got unlucky and the fim was defective?<br>

I have used 120 and 135 Ektar 100 before with great results and love the film - now I am very puzzeled!<br>

So, now I wonder WHAT COULD HAVE PRODUCED THE COLOUR CAST?<br>

Thanks for your help. I posted in the film forum too just in case some experienced users of Ektar don't regularly visit the MF forum.<br>

Thanks for your time and help!<br>

Cheers.</p>

[gregory_king1]

<p>I've only shot a couple rolls, and never noticed it...but I've read that others have IIRC.</p>

<p>You didn't notice it before?</p>

[andylynn]

<p>Ektar scans must be corrected in post. (Like its Vision2 cousin it's intended strictly for digital process, not optical printing.) If the Frontier didn't have an Ektar profile and used a generic profile a blue cast could result. Just do it yourself - I find an auto-levels-by-channel is often enough.</p>

[sasvata__shash__chatterjee]

<p>I shot a couple rolls of Ektar 120 (6x6) recently, processing was done by Fuji. The contact prints came out wonderful, with no casts. I had a heck of a time scanning with my Epson v600, with both Epson Scan and Vuescan Pro, with the blue cast. It was difficult to do levels adjust with Epson Scan, mostly due to how the GUI works. The Vuescan profile for Ektar didn't quite work for me. Eventually, I settled for no color balancing in Vuescan, and then adjusting white balance manually in LR.</p>

<p>Curiously, I have one frame where the shutter got inadvertently pushed while the camera was pointing upwards. It is a shot of the mostly blue sky with white clouds. It printed well in the contact prints as far as color is concerned. Vuescan cannot cope with this one frame for whatever reason, it comes out a horrible orange color, no matter what color balance mode I try, including None, Neutral and Auto.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>The Vuescan Ektar profile is for the old Ektar - this Ektar is a whole different film. For the Epsons with Vuescan, a good start would be to do the preview a blank part of the film, lock exposure, preview, lock film base color method, then scan with auto levels. Make sure you've got monitor and output color spaces, or you'll get a color shift caused by software in the output file. If you want to get more in depth on it you can have Vuescan save a DNG file and work with it in Adobe Camera Raw. </p>

[ondebanks]

<p>I found that Vuescan's generic colour negative setting worked best (rather than any specific film brand profile, and definitely not the 1990s Ektar profiles). </p>

<p>Auto-levels in Xnview usually takes care of any residual colour balance issues in the jpegs/tiffs that I make from Vuescan's dng files.</p>

[greg_peterson3]

<p>Andrew Lynn is correct: Ektar depends on some post processing work. </p>

<p>But to do that reliably requires that you "waste" a frame now and then on a gray card.</p>

<p>When you have a gray card image, fixing all kinds of color balance problems, whether they are from the scanning process or the light at the time you shot the picture, is generally quite easy.</p>

<p>If you post one of your "blue" scans I'd be happy to take a crack at making it at least a bit closer to what one might expect.<br>

</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

<p>I scan all my own film, and have been scanning Ektar (shot 3.5 km high up in the mountains, blue sky, white snow - blue cast territory, right?) last week (Nikon scanner, using Nikon Scan).<br />Straight out of the scanner (i.e. no tweaks, not even in Nikon Scan), no cast whatsoever.</p>

<p>So Ektar only "depends on some post processing work" if you mess up scanning badly.</p>

[predrag_vranic]

<p>I had troubles with Ektar, same thing, odd blueish casts, funky for some ugly for me. I think it reacts pretty much to light source and it's temperature, either way it's very sensitive film... and also once I changed my lab my negatives started to improve, so I guess maybe chemicals are a bit important too, blimey. I thought of dropping the whole ektar thing few times but I can't because some of my best work is achieved on that emulsion, sadly. :)</p>

[greg_peterson3]

<p>I stand corrected. I should have written "Ektar may often need some post processing, depending on your lab, scanner, scanning software, and the skill of the people doing the work."</p>

<p>I too generally get excellent results from Ektar 100 straight out of my CS9000 using Nikon Scan. But I get my film processed at a professional lab, and a Nikon scanner is worlds better than a Fuji Frontier.</p>

<p>I stand by my advice about shooting a gray card though. It's saved me a lot of sweat in some uncontrolled lighting situations. (e.g. architectural interiors with a mix of daylight, florescent and incandescent light.)</p>

<p> </p>

[j_rgen_loob]

<p>Simon<br>

I shot a couple of rolls KODAK EKTAR 100 (120 film) last year and all scans were done on my MICROTEK ARTIX SCAN F1 .<br>

Scanner software is SILVERFAST Ai Version 6.6.1r2 . I got absolutely correct scans with no color casts at all .<br>

I believe , that the results depend very much on the scanner and the scanner software .<br>

Do you have a chance to get scans done on a different scanner ? ? ? If so , I think , it is worth a try .</p>

<p>Jürgen</p>

<p> </p>

[j_rgen_loob]

<p>Sorry Simon<br>

I forgot to mention , that I was using the KODAK PORTA NC160 profile for scanning .<br>

This profile seems to be very much like the new profile for the EKTAR 100 , (Negafix Profil) which is available with the SILVERFAST Ai Version 6.6.2r2 for the MICROTEK ARTIXSCAN F1 scanner since July 2010 .<br>

That reminds me to upgrade to that new version .<br>

Jürgen</p>

 

[simonpg]

Many thanks to all for your comments. Well it's been a revelation!

I had no idea that Ektar was so sensitive to scanning workflow since my lab always does my scanning and Ektar is not

readilly available here. I don't do any scanning myself.

I gather that my lab needs to get the profile right for this film or risks triggering this Colour cast.

Despite having listened to many pro podcasts discussing the film's great attributes but never has Colour cast been referred

to when discussing it's scanning attributes!

So I will let my lab know they need to seek out the right profile and / or tweak their scanner.

Thanks for the kind offer Greg. My lab tells they managed to tweak the Colour. So if it persists to be a problen,Ill post an

image!

Cheers,

Simon.

[benny_spinoza]

<p>I used to get bluish scans, but not now because I pay more attention to color management. If you use SilverFast, make sure you create an icc profile from an E-6 target. I suspect that SilverFast uses that profile even for C-41 scanning. When I scan raw, I make sure that that E-6 target generated icc profile is the embedded color profile. I then process the raw scan in HDR Studio using that color profile, and using the Ektar negafix tool. The result is well color balanced images from scanned Ektar film.</p>

[simonpg]

Many thanks.

It is clear that the issue of profiles if far more significant with Ektar than anything I've shot before. My lab will just have to

get therofile set upmin their system.

Shashlik your experience is very similar.

The analolgy some users have made with the scanning process having a parallel with digital RAW capture is an interesting

one that puts handling Ektar into perspective.

Thanks again.

[simonpg]

Thanks Benny. Your comments about SilverFast are helpful and similar to Jurgen's experience. Funny thing was the lab

thought the Colour cast was due to the setting being mistakenly on E-6! Cheers.

[mauro_franic]

<p>I haven't experienced any cast problems (using a Coolscan 9000). See this example (from the scanner): </p>

<p>Note the palet is very different to my most used color film (Velvia) so Ektar does indeed leaves me wanting some tonal adjustments.</p><div></div>