abrewer Posted April 9, 2009 Share #1 Posted April 9, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) A few more images, this time from Washington DC during cherry blossom season, with Kodak Ektar 100: MP 28mm/f2ASPH Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! More images here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/sports-leisure-time/82918-cherry-blossom-time-tidal-basin.html#post869682 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! More images here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/sports-leisure-time/82918-cherry-blossom-time-tidal-basin.html#post869682 ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/81788-revisiting-kodak-ektar-100/?do=findComment&comment=867435'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 9, 2009 Posted April 9, 2009 Hi abrewer, Take a look here Revisiting Kodak Ektar 100. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
abrewer Posted April 10, 2009 Author Share #2 Posted April 10, 2009 Just a technical note: I've been rating the film at 82 (not a big thing I know) It seems to be at its best in full or nearly-full light...I'm less happy with shadows in these images Colors look real good to me for the most part--not too punched up Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sprow Posted April 12, 2009 Share #3 Posted April 12, 2009 I just returned from Zimbabwe and used nothing in my M7 except Ektar 100 and Tri X. So far the results (as prints) are excellent though I did have to tone down the reds a bit in post processing (Lightroom) and bring out hidden shadow detail in post. But it's a great film in my view and not expensive to get developed and have hi res scans put on a CD. Best. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBA Posted April 14, 2009 Share #4 Posted April 14, 2009 I'm also trying another two rolls because I liked the first two so much. My first couple of rolls were mostly monochrome, so I didn't notice any of the oversaturation so many people have objected to. I like the color balance because so far it comes closest to reminding me of Kodachrome. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Henry Posted April 14, 2009 Share #5 Posted April 14, 2009 Just a technical note: I've been rating the film at 82 (not a big thing I know) It seems to be at its best in full or nearly-full light...I'm less happy with shadows in these images Colors look real good to me for the most part--not too punched up Allan, Agreed with you Excellent contrast and deep colors (like Portra 400VC) Just one photo taken at Paris last week M7 lux 35mm (picture uncorrected) Best regards Henry Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/81788-revisiting-kodak-ektar-100/?do=findComment&comment=870822'>More sharing options...
Doc Henry Posted April 14, 2009 Share #6 Posted April 14, 2009 And for the sharpness of the grain at the time of the digital, this photo..... M7 Lux 35mm Paris March 2009 Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/81788-revisiting-kodak-ektar-100/?do=findComment&comment=870826'>More sharing options...
Kent10D Posted April 14, 2009 Share #7 Posted April 14, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Allan, Looking good. Looks as though you were shooting in pretty harsh light so drop-off in the shadows is, as you suggest, quite steep. But the color looks very nice. A question: did you have those scans done with the processing, or did you scan the negs yourself? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Antony Posted April 14, 2009 Share #8 Posted April 14, 2009 I have been using quite a bit of Ektar and will use more when it comes out in 120. Unlike other users I haven't found I need to down-rate in fact to me it seems to have a very good latitude at least (+2/-2) Yes by -2 the shadow detail is slightly lower, but not much different from most colour neg. I do like the way the blues and reds saturate, and yet even if you have vibrant reds the skin tones still look very good unlike some colour films (I'm looking at you Velvia). I think that is a very tricky thing for the emulsion engineer to achieve. The pink boots and the vibrant magenta bike are well rendered, even on a dull day in January. For anyone interested I have a review here: Ektar Review on Photo Utopia Regards Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Henry Posted April 14, 2009 Share #9 Posted April 14, 2009 Mark Thanks for the link , with your very interesting tests. Yes it looks like a Fuji Velvia as you said : agreed with you ! About the colors as i told above, it's sensational With the Portra 400VC it's now the two films Kodak,i shall use.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted April 14, 2009 Share #10 Posted April 14, 2009 I like the color balance because so far it comes closest to reminding me of Kodachrome. Very interesting. Now that you mention it, I have to agree. There is a similarity... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
abrewer Posted April 14, 2009 Author Share #11 Posted April 14, 2009 Very interesting. Now that you mention it, I have to agree. There is a similarity... Yes, I'm on board with that comment Very nice, indeed, to my eye Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBA Posted April 14, 2009 Share #12 Posted April 14, 2009 This illustrates what I like about Ektar. Great color balance, sharpness and exposure latitude. It renders shadow detail where Velvia just goes black. Scans beautifully too. MP, 50 Summicron, 1/125 @ f5.6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted April 14, 2009 Share #13 Posted April 14, 2009 Actually what really strikes me is how different color film looks than digital. I tend to forget that, because you see so little of it these days... Digital color is very accurate, where as color negative imparts a certain look or signature. It also looks smoother (tonality) and of course the DR is greater and the roll off in the highlights is much better. Obviously digital wins in the grain category, but I've never hated grain... I ended up developing a Kodachrome / Technicolor filter that I run my D700 files through. It goes a long way in taking the 'digital curse' off the files... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted April 14, 2009 Share #14 Posted April 14, 2009 Amazing how people's experiences with it differ. Mine was processed like a dog, and scanned like a dog. Saturation was at level 11. I wouldn't touch it again with a barge pole. Was your done on a Kodak processing machine, by any chance? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Antony Posted April 14, 2009 Share #15 Posted April 14, 2009 Amazing how people's experiences with it differ. Mine was processed like a dog, and scanned like a dog. Saturation was at level 11. I wouldn't touch it again with a barge pole. Was your done on a Kodak processing machine, by any chance? Andy Mine was processed by a Fuji minilab at Boots. I have had some rolls processed dip and dunk and really can't see much difference (apart from the negs being cut into 4's) I scanned them myself as I find Fuji minilabs tend to send out over saturated files with a smaller than sRGB gamut- a waste of time. For me the film is as close as I can get to slide in a neg film, here is a quick scan on a V500: Taken in warm (yellow) afternoon sun and deliberately processed to lack shadow detail in the trees. Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
abrewer Posted April 15, 2009 Author Share #16 Posted April 15, 2009 Amazing how people's experiences with it differ. Mine was processed like a dog, and scanned like a dog. Saturation was at level 11. I wouldn't touch it again with a barge pole. Was your done on a Kodak processing machine, by any chance? Hi Andy. Yes, my film was processed on a Kodak mini-lab at Target with prints and photo CD. As I said about the shadows, I am certain the tech had a go at lightening them with whatever passes for "Shadows/Highlights" in the machine's programming...and the results are worse for that. I'd like to know who's doing JBA's developing work. That result is exceptional to my eye. Thanks. Allan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBA Posted April 16, 2009 Share #17 Posted April 16, 2009 I'd like to know who's doing JBA's developing work. That result is exceptional to my eye. Thanks. Allan Thanks, Allan. Lemon is a major camera shop in Ginza, and they have a small specialty film processing lab. I'm pretty sure Kodak processes the film and the guy at the photo lab does the scanning. He did a great job with my archival Kodachromes too. I'll ask him about the specifics when I visit the lab this weekend after finishing up another two rolls of Ektar. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.