Going from Kodachrome to Ektar 100

[d_f11]

<p>News Years Day I'll go downtown like I allways have, yet this time it'll be with a roll of print film instead of Big K. I'm learning to live with the pain. Seriously. I havn't shot print film in over 2 decades, yet strangely enough, It doesn't feel as awefull or bleak as it did awhile back. I'd start a support group for mourners If I could. I WILL buy a roll of Ektar 100. I will embrace it. I will learn to love it... I will...O.K. stop it allready. Anyhow,what do all you Bg K shooters plan to shoot with in "its" place...?</p>

[vincent_peri]

<blockquote>

<p>Anyhow,what do all you Bg K shooters plan to shoot with in "its" place...?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I shoot Fuji Provia 100F and Astia 100F. One of these days, I'll try some Ektachrome.</p>

[john_shriver]

<p>Learning C-41 print film is the "go with the wave" move. The E-6 labs are dying one by one, and E-6 film without good processing is futile.<br>

Ektar 100 will behave a lot like Ektachrome -- easy to make it "go blue", particularly if you shoot in the shade. While Kodachrome would generally err on the warm side of reality, Ektar 100 and Ektachrome will render areas lit only by blue sky as bluish. That's just the truth of what they really look like without our eyes' "automatic white balance".<br>

Of course, it's easy to correct this in post-processing. Or, use an 81A filter, like many folks do with E-6 films.<br>

Ektar 100 can do some beautiful crisp bright colors. It isn't reality, but it's pretty. It's perkier than Ektachrome E100G or E100GX. I suspect it's on a par with Ektachrome E100VS, which I've never tried.<br>

I liked E100GX as a replacement for Kodachrome 64, since it's a little warmed up, and didn't tend towards blue shadows. But it's discontinued. Really not much different than E100G with an 81A filter, I suppose. But there aren't many situations where I want to shoot slides anymore, and Ektar 100 reinforced that feeling.<br>

If you liked the more muted colors of Kodachrome 200, or preferred Kodachrome 64 to Kodachrome 25, you might also like Kodak Portra films. You really need to scan Portra yourself to get the most from them, minilabs that boost the saturation in post-processing will hide the naturalness available from the Portra films. But if the high saturation of Kodachrome 25 rocked your boat, Portra won't excite you.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Ektar is probably my own choice, notwithstanding some peculiarities in the sky-lit shadows.<br>

I used to shoot Kodachrome 25 almost exclusively for normal light conditions, but was never all that thrilled with K-64 until very late in its history. The last rolls I shot on it were close to the old Kodachrome in crispness, etc.</p>

<p>When everything is scanned in anyhow, the better C-41 films seem to give good results. If I were still (click, click, whirrr... zzzzzz....) showing slides, I'd shoot the slowest slide films I could find.</p>

[dangoldman]

<p>Provia 100 and Velvia 50, though i think both of those recently took a price hike. In all honesty i think my film shooting is quickly going to become mostly black and white and i will be using digital a lot more than i have been since i started using kodachrome a few years ago.</p>

[joseph_wisniewski]

<p>Go digital. It's much more like the slide film experience than that flaky print film ever will be.</p>

[chrisnielsen]

<p>I've been shooting E100G recently, awesome stuff! Still have 8 expired rolls of K64 to go through before Dwayne's shuts down. </p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>Go digital. It's much more like the slide film experience than that flaky print film ever will be.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Except when you want to put it in the projector and view a beautiful bright image on a screen.</p>

<p> </p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Well, Steve, some of the projectors available now for digital are brighter than the old 300-500 watt projectors of days gone by.</p>

<p>I haven't seen a professional presentation with anything but digital projection of 'slides' for years.</p>

<p>You could always record and play an MP3 or something of a Kodak projector to play while you're talking. :)</p>

[rossb]

<p>I have not used Kodachrome for some time but these days I shoot Kokak Portra, Delta 100, and if I want a slide film I use Elitechrome. However I am using mostly Portra and looking forward to trying out the new Portra 400 Pro.</p>

[dave_b15]

<blockquote>

<p>Except when you want to put it in the projector and view a beautiful bright image on a screen.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>What are these "projectors" and "screens" you're speaking of? Are those some sort of iPhone app or digital frame?</p>

[hillary_charles]

<p>I just finished my last roll of K64 last weekend, and have half a roll of K25 to go and that's it for my Kodachrome. </p>

<p>Since I overwhelmingly shoot stereo slides, Ektar is not an option. I've pretty much made the transition to Astia 100F. There may be some Provia or E100G in my future as well. One camera will be loaded with Velvia, ready for the more spectacular sunrises. As much as I love(d) Kodachrome, making the best of the situation ain't so bad...for now.</p>

 

[pmind]

<p>Provia.</p>

[d_f11]

<p> Don't you all get it by now - I will never ever touch a digital camera, that's why Kodachromes loss is a trauma for me.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>Ektar works best if you're willing to do digital postprocessing. If you're not, consider other options like 160VC or Reala or Gold 100/200 or E100G...</p>

[randrew1]

<p>I have seen the future of theater projection and it involves laser powered digital projectors. This was last night at the Rochester section of the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE). Kodak was demonstrating laser projection technology. (It looked very good.) This technology may make its way into conference room projectors. Home projectors are less likely.</p>

<p>In 20 years, working Carousel projectors will be uncommon. If you want to project images, digital will be the easiest way to go. For now, my Carousel works fine. I will try a roll of Ektachrome sometime, but after Kodachrome, much of my film shooting will be medium format. Since I don't have a Hasselblad projector, I will probably be shooting Ektar 100. </p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>You could always record and play an MP3 or something of a Kodak projector to play while you're talking.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Are you crazy? It would have to be a recording on a Ferrograph reel to reel tape recorder.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>If you want to project images, digital will be the easiest way to go.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It will always be possible to shine a light through a transparency and focus it onto a flat surface. That sort of thing can be built in a well equipped shed or workshop. In fact I plan to make something similar to a magic lantern projector to take 6x7 transparencies.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>Just get the kind of projector they sold before the Carousel, where you put a stack of slides in the feeder and push the thing in... I completely forget what they're called but I got one for $5 a while back. The older the equipment, the longer it lasts.</p>

[randrew1]

<p>Andrew,<br>

Is that a Kodak Cavalcade or some other brand? The slide changing mechanism on those projectors was not great, but the optics were superb. </p>

[andylynn]

<p>Ah, here it is. It's a Kodak 500.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>I have the Kodak 500. Bought it new when I got my Heiland Pentax H2 from A-Smile-A-Minute Camera store.</p>

<p>I originally bought it with the Airequipt metal magazines and changer, but bought the stack loader for it out of old Kodak stock many years later.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The older the equipment, the longer it lasts.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>However, the older it gets the rarer and more expensive the projection bulbs become. However, there still are occasional bargains on eBay. Most of the dedicated "bulb" stores are considerably higher, it they have the bulb at all.<br>

As a result, I use it only rarely; even more rarely now that I have the bulk of my slides digitized.</p>

[AlanKlein]

 

<blockquote>

<p ><a name="00Xh4l"></a><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=4802905">Andrew Lynn</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub10.gif" alt="" /><img title="Frequent poster" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/2rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Nov 16, 2010; 04:24 p.m.</p>

</blockquote>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Ektar works best if you're willing to do digital postprocessing. If you're not, consider other options like 160VC or Reala or Gold 100/200 or E100G...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Andrew: Why select one over the other? Why does Ektar 100 take more PP?</p>

 

 

[andylynn]

<p>Ektar can pick up color casts pretty easily. You'll want to color correct it in post. Anyway, you look at its strengths - almost no grain, lots of DR, technical accuracy - the stuff is the film equivalent of a raw file, it wants to be manipulated.</p>

[photo5]

<blockquote>

<p>In 20 years, working Carousel projectors will be uncommon. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>Really? I have three Carousel projectors, all working, two of them from the early 70s, and the newest one was purchased in 1992, and I found it at an estate sale, virtually unused, with the original receipt still in the box. I hardly think all three of these projectors will no longer work in 20 years. We may no longer be able to buy the projector bulbs in 20 years, but I am sure these quality-made in USA projectors will last longer than 20 years...</p>

[kparratt]

<p>I'm looking for an actual update on Dwayne's Kodakrome closure. Any tips?<br>

I'm hoping an 11th hour rush will delay the execution, and give me time to use up the bundle of 64 on it's way.</p>