Ektar 100 in 220?

Discussion in 'Color: Film, Paper, and Chemistry' started by aoresteen, Apr 30, 2009.

  1. aoresteen

    aoresteen Subscriber

    Messages:
    516
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2004
    Location:
    Newnan, GA,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I just got off the phone with Kodak Professional (1-800-242-2424 option 13 - B&W gets you to the pro color division guys).

    I asked about Ektar 100 in 220 rolls. He said it was possible but didn't know if it was in the plans. Every call get tracked and are reviewd by production managers.

    So if you are interested in seeing Ektar 100 in 220 rolls, give Kodak a ring and ASK them for it. It can't hurt!
     
  2. PhotoJim

    PhotoJim Member

    Messages:
    2,223
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Location:
    Regina, SK,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I'm not going to get greedy! I imagine if it's highly successful in 120, 220 is well possible.
     
  3. E76

    E76 Member

    Messages:
    374
    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Location:
    Rochester, N
    Shooter:
    Instant Films
    I agree—let's not get ahead of ourselves! For the time being (and foreseeable future), I'd be satisfied if medium format film only came in 120 format.
     
  4. Sirius Glass

    Sirius Glass Subscriber

    Messages:
    19,467
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    Location:
    Southern California
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    What he said!

    Steve
     
  5. Chazzy

    Chazzy Member

    Messages:
    2,951
    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2004
    Location:
    South Bend,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    And I'd be satisfied if 220 were available in every emulsion!
     
  6. Edwardv

    Edwardv Member

    Messages:
    397
    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I am still waiting for the return of 220 in Plus-X.
     
  7. aoresteen

    aoresteen Subscriber

    Messages:
    516
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2004
    Location:
    Newnan, GA,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    But guys, if we don't ask for it, how will Kodak know that we want it?
     
  8. Q.G.

    Q.G. Inactive

    Messages:
    5,682
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2007
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Quite right.
     
  9. sidearm613

    sidearm613 Member

    Messages:
    269
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Location:
    Los Angeles,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I just want more B+W 220 choices for me! How about some plus-x, FP4, Pan F+, or one of the more specialty emulsions (Efke 25...) in 220. Oh, I'll keep dreaming.
     
  10. Ektagraphic

    Ektagraphic Member

    Messages:
    2,893
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2009
    Location:
    Southeastern
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Write a letter to Kodak! It may be effective if they get enough....I am doubtful that will say yes.
     
  11. Chazzy

    Chazzy Member

    Messages:
    2,951
    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2004
    Location:
    South Bend,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    That would please me a good deal more than Ektar 100 in 220, but then, I think that everything should be available in 220.
     
  12. Edwardv

    Edwardv Member

    Messages:
    397
    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Hear! Hear! Another around of drinks for every film in 220.
     
  13. LightMiner

    LightMiner Member

    Messages:
    1
    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2009
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Reason for 220

    I really, really prefer 220 because I get the dinky CD horrible scan at time of processing, particularly if using negative film as otherwise I have no idea what I have and don't own a scanner. When I find images I really like, I have them drum scanned and sometimes rent a flextight at a local place. But in the short term I use the 3 - 5 MB images on the CD scan at time of processing - which is 20 or 25 bucks per CD or something like that. It doesn't matter if its 120 or 220. So, if I go out for a 3 or 4 day shooting trip and come back with what would either be 6 rolls of 220 or 12 rolls of 120, it costs *a lot* more if I'm using 120.

    And obviously, if you do 6X9, 6X12 or 6X17 then 220 rocks! And I do rent a 6X17 on ocassion.

    I do have to say, though, after years of exposure and f-stop bracketing with the same camera (and going through tons of 220 because of all the bracketing:smile: ) I'm getting to the point where I take very very few pictures, and a high percentage of them come out well. My 'digital' brothers and sisters on the other hand shoot at anything that moves or doesn't move and have a very low percentage of keepers. It is all very interesting... (I don't think the shotgun approach is bad, but I do find the difference interesting. It is a hobby after all, whatever makes people happy!)
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. Aurelien

    Aurelien Advertiser

    Messages:
    669
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Location:
    Limoges, Fra
    Shooter:
    Med. Format RF
    I agree: larger choice of film in 220 would be wonderful. In particular in B&W, where only txp 320 is available. Plus X would be a great choice.
     
  16. benjiboy

    benjiboy Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,120
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    Location:
    U.K.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I doubt it, at a time when most manufacturers are thinking of discontinuing 220 film because of the low sales volume, I'll just be happy that they continue to make it in 120 if the level of sales justify it .
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 5, 2009
  17. Sirius Glass

    Sirius Glass Subscriber

    Messages:
    19,467
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    Location:
    Southern California
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Ditto.

    When I pickup up MF again, I wanted to shoot 220 but the selection of available films was not.

    Steve
     
  18. bagdad child

    bagdad child Member

    Messages:
    45
    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2008
    Location:
    Sweden
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Somewhat off topic but hopefully useful..

    A few observations after my first roll of Ektar 100 in 120 shot and scanned. Be careful about underexposing shadow areas in a scene if you don't intend to have black shadows with very little or no detail. One stop of underexposure in shadows worked out ok for my taste but not more. Please note that a high-end scanner may give different results compared to my ones. I overexposed a few shots by about two stops (metering sunlit areas) to have good shadows and the highlights looked great. Box speed is fine for backlit scenes with low contrasts. I have read that some people rate it at 64 or 50, but I would say you should rate it according to the scene and conditions. Sometimes it will be iso 25 and sometimes box speed. Colors are beautiful but not necessarily natural. I photographed mostly violet and purple colored flowers, green leaves and grass and blue skies. The colors pop in a strange cold manner. I like it but you need to judge for yourself. The film scans very well.
     
  19. Chazzy

    Chazzy Member

    Messages:
    2,951
    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2004
    Location:
    South Bend,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I'm another person who would be happy if Kodak could offer more emulsions in 220. But increasing the number of black and white options would take priority for me over Ektar 100.
     
  20. Q.G.

    Q.G. Inactive

    Messages:
    5,682
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2007
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Indeed. I want TMax in 220 badly!
     
  21. Chazzy

    Chazzy Member

    Messages:
    2,951
    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2004
    Location:
    South Bend,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I'm a little surprised that Kodak didn't offer the new TMax 400 in 220, since Kodak seems to push their TMax films and the latest version ought to have wide professional appeal.
     
  22. Athiril

    Athiril Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,887
    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2009
    Location:
    Melbourne, V
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I would settle for Royal Gold 25 in 120, not Ektar 100! :tongue:
     
  23. Sysygy

    Sysygy Member

    Messages:
    26
    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2006
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Dear Kodak,
    Thank you for Ektar. Please make it in 220.
    Sincerely,
    Sysygy
     
  24. Athiril

    Athiril Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,887
    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2009
    Location:
    Melbourne, V
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Take a MF shooters poll and ask them how many of them use 220.
     
  25. hrst

    hrst Member

    Messages:
    1,300
    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Location:
    Finland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    That would be unfair, because you cannot use products that do not exists. You should ask how many would use 220, or are using 220 of those products that are sold in 220, which is quite rare.

    I would like to use 220 in my Mamiya 7 for most films.

    And, as we know, it's not a matter of manufacture, but more like a matter of organization of the packaging and retailer chain.
     
  26. Sirius Glass

    Sirius Glass Subscriber

    Messages:
    19,467
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    Location:
    Southern California
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Like it or not. 220 is slowly dieing. There is not hope for a change.

    Steve