Kodak Ektar 100

[danielheller]

<p>Your experiences with this film please:<br>

What do you mainly use this film for?<br>

What is the resulting color palette?<br>

Do you expose it at 100IS0?<br>

Things to do and not to do with this film?<br>

Your scanning experiences with this film?<br>

Thank you all in advance.</p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>It scans nicely and I use it for everything.</p>

 

[AlanKlein]

<p>I seem to have more problems scanning Ektar 100 and getting the colors I want than with Velvia 50. Maybe it's me. Why don't you shoot a couple of rolls and see if you like it.</p>

[vrankin]

<p>I just bought a roll at a photo store and will put i through my old Kodak Retinette when we get something colorful growing in Wisconsin again. I'm interested in seeing other posts on this thread - hopefully linked to samples.</p>

[bebu_lamar]

<p>I use it as a general purpose film. I shoot it at ISO100 there is no need for additional exposure with this film. The color is relatively high saturation. The primary problem with printing and scanning this film is that it is very sensitive with the color temperature of the light source. For example if you shoot a scene having both in shade and in the light. Since the color temperature of these are different you would have different color rendition on each part. Other film isn't that sensitive. It's very fine grain which I like it a lot. I have not used it in mixed lighting and low light. I think it could be problemmatic. </p>

[scott_murphy5]

<p>I use Ektar 100 Professional film for general color work with my Blad but for portraiture I stick to Portra exclusively. It renders skin tones better than Ektra in my opinion, though I am not saying that Ektra is unsuitable for portrait work, it works ok</p>

[scott_murphy5]

<p>Double post, sorry ladies gents! I have no idea why this happens sometimes!</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Personally, I find it a wonderful substitute for my old favorite, Kodachrome, even though it's a C/N film, of course. Its grain (or lack of) is great.</p>

<p>The color palette, on the other hand, has a pronounced tendency to go very blue in open sky shadows. Usually this can be fixed in post processing.</p>

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

[john_shriver]

<p>Best way to scan Ektar 100 I've found is using SilverFast with the NegaFix profile for Ektar 100. While some of the NegaFix profiles I'm not impressed with, the one for Ektar 100 really gives much better results than any other path I've tried. I realize that people either love or hate SilverFast, and it is expensive. But the trial is free.<br>

It's very saturated, like Ektachrome E100VS was. This is not a film that will give you the "TRVTH", it's going to add punch. Closest thing to "accurate" is Portra 400.</p>

[donbright]

<p>Haven't tried Ektar in 120 yet. I think of it is a general color film other than the use for Portraits, but does very well with objects. Light conditions are crucial, like Velvia, needs low contrast conditions, but will punch contrasty conditions well with good light. Bad light is hazy, mid day hot dirty light. Ektar hates that. We hate that. Anyway Ektar is magic.</p><div></div>

[alekos_elefteriadis]

<p>-I try once but is over contrast for my taste, and have color shift in shadows as other say.<br>

-I print color in my own darkroom and i think those ektar is optimizer for scanning than traditional printing.<br>

-If you want this film for scanning maybe is good i don't now as i am against scanning processes for many reasons.</p>

 

[howardsandler]

this is a film that loves red.

 

 

This red of the tomatoes was very deep, but it renders here as a more candy red than reality seemed to me. No saturation added in post.

 

It scans with very little grain, more like slide film. Far less than even new Porta 160. I find it shoots well at box speed. snappy contrast. A very different look than Portra.

[bob_h]

<p>Ektar 100 looks like a film that I will be trying very soon.<br>

From the pictures that I have seen that have been made with Ektar 100 I really like the look.<br>

In a way it reminds me of a faster version of the virtually grainless old Ektar 25.<br>

Both of the Portra films look lifeless to my eyes. Ektar, get ready.</p>

[greg_peterson3]

<p>I use it often for aerial photography. I scan it on my Nikon Coolscan 9000. As JDM points out, the shadows often go blue, but I find I can mitigate that by pulling the cyan down (rather than blue) which usually leaves the sky in tact.</p>

 

[mva]

<p>When I am undecided between black&white and colour, I use Ektar.<br>

In my opinion, when a scene has (already) great colours, then I want something like Provia or Velvia to make them pop. If I use Ektar in these cases, then I am always disappointed because Ektar introduces strong colour casts and make the colours that I liked unrecognizable.<br>

On the other hand, if I have a scene with dull colours or a scene that would render well in B&W because mostly based on strong shapes, lines, contrast, then I usually like Ektar's results very much because the film is able to add colour in ways that I did not even imagine but always maintaining good harmony between the colour casts.</p>