Kodak Ektar 100 - Is This a Bad Joke from Kodak?

Discussion in 'Color: Film, Paper, and Chemistry' started by Andre Noble, Jul 14, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Andre Noble

    Andre Noble Subscriber

    Messages:
    330
    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2004
    Location:
    Beverly Hill
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Hello,

    I shot a couple rolls of this and I thought the cyan color cast was depressing - as in some 1950's or 1960's era type color film.
    I mean, google the name Kodak Ektar 100 and look at all the images, they also look like it has a very limited color pallet...

    I mean who's drinking this Kool-Aid, er using this film? Why? I won't argue with you. I just want to hear your viewpoint if you like this film.

    The reason I seem upset is that I am looking to stockpile some color neg film that will last, hence the slow speed. But Fuji Reala 100 has been discontinued and Kodak Ektar 100, well, looks less than promising.
     
  2. xenophon

    xenophon Member

    Messages:
    6
    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2010
    Location:
    Athens, Gree
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    All I can say is that with normal lab processing and subsequent scanning (Coolscan 9000, Silverfast 8.0 on a Mac), one usually has to tweak the color profile for accurate color; in Silverfast this is accomplished by editing the (proprietary) "Negafix" profile.

    My out-of-the-box result with this scanning setup are exactly like you described.

    It's supposed to be a film emulsion specifically designed for scanning, and I guess it is worth persevering to get optimal results.

    Oh, and one final thing - underexposure probably shifts the colors to a hellish blue/magenta cast!

    The bottom line is probably that Ektar does live up to its hype.

    With greetings from Athens,

    Xen
     
  3. xxloverxx

    xxloverxx Member

    Messages:
    156
    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Location:
    Hong Kong/Pa
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    I've shot a few rolls in the past few years and have had no problems with scans. Some shot at night, some shot during the day.
     
  4. Steve Smith

    Steve Smith Member

    Messages:
    9,092
    Joined:
    May 3, 2006
    Location:
    Ryde, Isle o
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I like it but I found I had to over expose a little bit to stop the sky going too cyan.


    Steve.
     
  5. mhanc

    mhanc Member

    Messages:
    274
    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2008
    Location:
    NY
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    i have had similar results - mainly with the sky being too cyan. I also do not find the film to be "ultra vivid color" as described by kodak... but then i mostly use transparency film when i shoot color.
     
  6. markbarendt

    markbarendt Subscriber

    Messages:
    7,606
    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Beaverton, OR
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    If you like Reala there's a fair chunk of it available. (I assume you are talking about 120 given your profile).

    Amazon has it.

    Adorama has it.

    B&H is showing a backorder not a discontinuance.

    There's plenty on eBay.

    Why are you grousing about a film you aren't being forced to use and apparently haven't even tried yourself?
     
  7. Arkasha

    Arkasha Member

    Messages:
    112
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2012
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    To be fair, the OP did indicate he'd used a couple of rolls of the Ektar . . .
     
  8. Fotoguy20d

    Fotoguy20d Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,234
    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Location:
    NJ
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I bought a 5 pack earlier this year in 120, expecting it to be like the Ektar I used in the 90s. I dont think its terrible, but I'm mostly using it with lenses that weren't intended for color film anyway (1920s and earlier generally). But, needing some more, I bought Reala (a 5 pack from Amazon - better price than Ektar anyway, around $20, I think)

    Dan
     
  9. Grainy

    Grainy Member

    Messages:
    189
    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    Location:
    Norway
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Haven't shot a ton of Ektar, but so far I love it. But I don't like it for all purposes, so I also use a Portra 160 when I need low ISO.
     
  10. markbarendt

    markbarendt Subscriber

    Messages:
    7,606
    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Beaverton, OR
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    You are absolutely right, I goofed there. My apologies about that Andre.
     
  11. David A. Goldfarb

    David A. Goldfarb Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    17,980
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2002
    Location:
    Honolulu, Ha
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Color palette is always a matter of taste. If there was fresh Agfachrome 100 with the pastel look it had in the late 1980s, I'd be shooting it.

    That said, a cyan cast sounds like a printing issue more than a film issue, since it's negative film, and the negative always has to be interpreted to produce accurate color.
     
  12. Mustafa Umut Sarac

    Mustafa Umut Sarac Member

    Messages:
    4,578
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2006
    Location:
    İstanbul
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    I love Kodak , I have no problem with them and I use them but I cant agree with their Ektar and movie films. I saw many Ektar shots at gallery and high contrast and low contrast colors seem to me out of taste , not artful or harmonic. But Portra is excellent , may be they stopped Ektachrome and stop its compete with modern film colors to open space for new films. If I cant find fresh portra anymore here , I will go back to 5222 route with Microdol 1+1 and leave the color photography. Wow I have a problem with Kodak management also.!!!

    Umut
     
  13. TareqPhoto

    TareqPhoto Member

    Messages:
    1,043
    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2009
    Location:
    Ajman - UAE
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    In fact i was thinking Ektar will be my favorite color neg, i liked it, but once i used Reala 100 i changed my mind completely, Reala is my favorite color film now, and if this is going to be discontinued also then i will give up color film and use digital for color, Ektar100 will not make my mind over Reala as it didn't so far.
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. batwister

    batwister Member

    Messages:
    919
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2010
    Location:
    Midlands, UK
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Been using Ektar exclusively for a project recently and it's my colour film of choice for anything other than people. Definitely an acquired taste and very problematic in my experience under blue skies - and I won't go anywhere near dawn or sunset with it either. I've been producing most of my work in a very green place and this is the reason I chose the film. It does something quite unique with greens, specifically under overcast skies - which are just about the only skies we get here.

    In flat light the added punch you'll get from colours can work wonders if you're very selective - but isn't that the trick of photography anyway?
    The saturation and contrast are definitely too much for me in direct sunlight. And of course, that cyan cast isn't going to be helped by blue skies - yes, shadows look like swimming pools.

    In my mind it should be sold as a 'flat light film'. If you look at any contemporary colour work, you'll notice blank skies a plenty. Something tells me this film is aimed directly at those adhering to this popular aesthetic. Kodak's first 'fine art' film?


    An ollllld image, but the kind of 'scene' I feel the film works best under.
    2.jpg

    The American Jeff Brouws uses Ektar and I'm almost certain this image is - http://www.jeffbrouws.com/series/highway_F13.html
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 14, 2012
  16. Ektagraphic

    Ektagraphic Member

    Messages:
    2,914
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2009
    Location:
    Southeastern
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Perhaps something was slightly off with the processing. Give Kodak a call and let them know....
     
  17. tkamiya

    tkamiya Member

    Messages:
    4,252
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2009
    Location:
    Central Flor
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I used it few times in the past. As Kodak says, it's super saturated in color. It wasn't to my taste. I didn't think any particular color was more saturated than others.

    I think of it as a special purpose film where color saturation is important.
     
  18. Andre Noble

    Andre Noble Subscriber

    Messages:
    330
    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2004
    Location:
    Beverly Hill
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I agree with most here. Nothing wrong with my processing - done by A&I in Hollywood about 3 years ago. My Ektar scanned on Nikon 5000. Cyan cast. Also vast majority of online examples of Ektar 100 also look bad.

    Here's what I think: I think Kodak told their (young, fresh out of RIT, RPI, MIT, etc) engineers to build the best ISO 100 color neg film they could. This is not a film devised by Kodak's all time best and brightest.

    If it were any good, they'd be selling a lot more of it. It sells only because its one of the last standing. That's all.

    I'll research the Fuji Reala in 120 y'all mentioned.
     
  19. RPC

    RPC Member

    Messages:
    626
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I don't scan, but optically print my negatives and I have never had any of the problems with Ektar that people complain about, no blue in the shadows, no cyan cast, etc. So I believe scanning must be causing a lot of the problems users have. I have been using films for over 30 years and it is not a poorly designed film. I would not use it where good skin tones are important due to its higher saturation but when vivid colors are desired it does well when exposed and printed properly.
     
  20. TareqPhoto

    TareqPhoto Member

    Messages:
    1,043
    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2009
    Location:
    Ajman - UAE
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    This shot alone made my mind for Reala 100

    img010v.jpg

    And here are 2 shots from Ektar that i feel it is fine, but i favor color of Reala over Ektar

    img186z.jpg

    img183b.jpg

    Sorry, but all scanned by my flatbed, wish to have a drum scanner or at least film dedicated scanner.
     
  21. TareqPhoto

    TareqPhoto Member

    Messages:
    1,043
    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2009
    Location:
    Ajman - UAE
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Oh there are more of Reala, sorry to hidjack

    img013v.jpg
    img067m.jpg
    img192k.jpg
    img190.jpg
    img191m.jpg

    My bad sharpness killed some of those shots. If you want to see some more from Ektar let me know.
     
  22. kuparikettu

    kuparikettu Member

    Messages:
    126
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    Location:
    Tampere, Fin
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I like Ektar very much. It is as its best for me when used for nature and landscape photography. The ra-4 prints from those are just gorgeus. I don't know of you others, but I intend to buy lots of this film to my freezer. I'm not interested in Velvia, as I want to make prints of my photos, so Ektar is exactly the thing I need: colourful, high contrast and those get even better when printed as large prints on Fuji Crystal Archive.

    For general photography my choice of film is portra 400, but for the above mentioned uses.. there just is no competition in my opinion.
     
  23. Tony-S

    Tony-S Member

    Messages:
    785
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2009
    Location:
    Fort Collins
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I love Ektar.

    I also love Portra 400.

    And Portra 160.

    And Fuji Pro 160S.

    And Velvia 50.

    And...
     
  24. Pioneer

    Pioneer Member

    Messages:
    1,746
    Joined:
    May 29, 2010
    Location:
    Elko, Nevada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I loved them every one...I think there is a song in there somewhere
     
  25. David A. Goldfarb

    David A. Goldfarb Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    17,980
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2002
    Location:
    Honolulu, Ha
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    If you're scanning a negative and the result has a cyan cast, then that's a scanning issue, just as a cyan cast when printing conventionally is a filtration issue. There is no such thing as a neutral setting for printing a color negative. Conventional printing always requires a filter pack, and scanning always requires evaluation and adjustment.
     
  26. Diapositivo

    Diapositivo Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,326
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    Location:
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter:
    35mm
    All photographic scanner should be calibrated, it is a very simple procedure - it requires spending some $40 to buy the calibrated "targets" - but it makes a lot of difference. If you don't calibrate your scanner you might end up never finding a proper filtration.

    More than that, to extract the most from a new colour negative film the best would be to take some pictures of a colour chart and create a profile for your scanner/film couple.

    The resulting profiles (scanner profile and film profile) should allow you to correctly filter all images taken in the same light condition and not to become mad if you need to filter images taken in different light conditions.

    I never practiced colour printing but I suppose it is the same: a new film should require some shots of a colour chart in the light conditions for which the film is calibrated (normally 5500 °K) and finding the filtration which gives a print which closely matches the colour chart. That would give you a filtration which should be valid in most situations.

    I've also read that Ektar doesn't tolerate underexposure without punishing you with unbalanced colours.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.