Jump to content

Kodak Ektar 100


Dinas Dave

Recommended Posts

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

"Good news !

 

We now have stock of the following item.

 

EK136 - Kodak EKTAR 100 ASA - 135-36 (Single Roll) - BRAND NEW !

 

We are pleased to let you know that this item

will now be dispatched to you.

Please allow up to 7 days for delivery.

 

Kind regards,

Customer Services

 

7dayshop.com "

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's down to £8 and change now, but still insane. I got a roll in the US for $4.99. Shouldn't be more than £4 even with the exchange rate and VAT, unless it's processing-included.

 

Something strange is going here in merry old England. A roll of Ilford Delta3200 recently jumped to £6 pounds! The same store is selling Tmax P3200 for £2.50.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I used the 160VC profile in Vuescan - Post Office red and Hi-Vis jackets seem to be a bit off colour and need a bit more work.

 

EktarTest1_1.jpg

EktarTest1_5.jpg

 

100% crop at 4000 dpi

EktarTest1_7.jpg

 

PS. Some the shots were done within a hour of sunrise - so some of the warmth is natural.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but those colours are terrible!!

 

I hope it is only processing or scanning problems because a film that produces those colurs is fatal to "normal" photography. I know Ektar traditionally had 'punch' in its colours but what I see here is a TKO of Ektar.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's one shot in Liverpool last week, courtesy of Chris on the forum who donated a roll to my cause :)

 

I deliberately chose a view with high contrast, and the film handles the range of bright to dark areas well, I reckon.

 

I used the "Kodak Royal Gold 100" setting in Vuescan, but it's still not right, and needed some Auto White Balance in PS, plus some curves. These colours are about right, I'd say, but the reds may be a bit much.

 

Used in full sun, the film is far, far too contrasty, IMHO.

 

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

Andy, those colours don't look right to my eyes. The cyan pavement in the shadows is a real worry. I assume the green on the upper deck is coming from fluorescent lights or green coloured transparent roofing. I'm wondreing if the scan is the problem. I will try and acquire a roll of that stuff and run it through my system. Problem is, 'Oz" is the poor country cousin of the the world and so the Ektar probably hasn't reached here yet. :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, the whole place is under a glass roof, so the colours are going to be skewed. Maybe not such a good venue after all :)

 

Here's one, from the same day, just across the road.

 

I just don't like the film at all, and to me, it just reinforces my decision to leave C41 behind (unless it's for work related stuff, in which case a commercial scan is fine).

 

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

I'm kind of surprised at what I'm seeing here as the rolls I shot in October were much more natural in color than these "hyped-up" images everyone's posting now

 

Unfortunately it's been so cold here I haven't had a chance to get out and use any more of the stuff; so it'll probably be spring before I can compare again to what you guys are getting

Link to post
Share on other sites

Allan

 

These are not hyped-up (well, mine aren't :) ) These are hyped -down. The commercial scans I got with the processing are twice as bad as this one of the boat in the dock.

 

It's incredible.

 

There is absolutely no way on earth that this could replace slide film, which is what Kodak are claiming. It will be interesting to see what Chris comes up with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is absolutely no way on earth that this could replace slide film, which is what Kodak are claiming. It will be interesting to see what Chris comes up with.

 

Well at the moment nothing as I am still on my B+W trip shooting the Movie film stock 5222 but now I must load a roll ASAP.

There are results on flickr tagged Ekar100 that are nice where these are plain not nice.

 

I note you had them scanned on developing but did you not get a set of prints? They would be interesting to compare. It may be the scanning settings ? But still the grain is good :rolleyes:

 

I did read where underexposure is not liked so a set of bracket shots may be in order but yours don't look under and that may have been from a 'chrome shooter not used to negative stock.

 

apologies for the pun but we await developements :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The prints are even more saturated and contrasty that shown above, Chris. This reference scan from the CD is pretty close to what the print looks like

 

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

The image from the CD is much more like what I was getting, Andy

 

That first one, the colors are really peculiar (especially the orange hull on the ship)

 

I was wondering: do you shoot with a UV filter on your M lens?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...