Switch to English Language Passer en langue franēaise Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,959   Posts: 1,523,052   Online: 1162
      
Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567891011 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 101
  1. #51
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    Quote Originally Posted by RPC View Post
    When one considers the many variables there can be in scanning such as scanner response and settings, profiles, image processing, and monitor characteristics and settings, it amazes me how anyone can think a film can be judged on computer screen from a scan, as we frequently see here.
    I definitely agree.

    (And just to contradict myself I will add that the images of Fuji Pro 800 at Sunset two posts above look a bit strange here with that a bit too much evident yellow patch on the neck of the woman, sunset or not sunset. But they might appear differently on another monitor).
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  2. #52
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,243
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by Andre Noble View Post
    FAIL. The cyan cast feels very depressing to me.

    This awful color is precisely ONE of the reasons I won't buy Ektar 100. Not making a personal shot at you, rather of an emulsion that is short of what Kodak is capable of manufacturing.

    The current Kodak Ektar 100 film lacks what I will describe as color accuracy AND color contrast.

    An experienced darkroom worker understands these when he/she has dialed in the best color correction filtration from a good color film and the colors throughout the image "pop" because of their freedom from color crossover and unfavorable color casts.
    Andre - don't go blaming the film for the darkroom/computer operator's error. Yes, there's a cyan cast to the scene. And it's entirely correctable. Therefore, there's no excuse for leaving it in. The cause of it in that scan is either the photographer has a poorly calibrated monitor and therefore doesn't see it (I've seen enough monitors out there with a decided red tint that this is quite believable, ditto when it comes to the blown-out highlights) or it's "good enough" and he either doesn't know how to fix the issues with his scan, or doesn't care to.

  3. #53
    Andre Noble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Beverly Hills, CA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    220
    Quote Originally Posted by RPC View Post
    I am one who prints Ektar optically....and my prints look as good or better than anything I've done in the past. No blue shadows, no cyan skies, no harsh contrast, no crossover, just more vivid colors that look good when they are appropriate.
    If you have the time, can you post said darkroom print/s from Ektar 100? Maybe you are right - but i seriously doubt it.

    PS: even EK knows there are undesirable characteristics of Ektar 100 and even hinted on their Facebook page that they are in the process of reformulating it.

    Diapositivo, yes the lady's neck is jaundiced. That's due to my over correction that you can see even running into her blue shirt. But please show me a Kodak Ektar 100 scan or darkroom print that even looks nearly as good.
    Last edited by Andre Noble; 10-05-2012 at 09:19 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    Andre Noble, Beverly Hills California http://andrenoble.com/

  4. #54
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,243
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    435
    Andre- how about this one then?



    And yes, he does look red. But he's leaning up against a gigantic RED reflector!

  5. #55
    Hatchetman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    570
    Images
    6
    I dunno. I've always been happy with my Ektar. Maybe you guys can tell me what is wrong with these.




  6. #56
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    Nothing wrong with these, Hatchetman. The train picture is a nice example of a natural sky. In order to see it is important to click the yellow bar and see it against a neutral background. The yellow bar ("click this bar to view the full image") is very close to the sky and might suggest a very slight cyan cast which isn't there, as shown by the "enlarged" image.

    If possible I would suggest to the site operator to change the background colour of the bar to a neutral grey.

    I remain convinced the sky is the acid test of correct filtration. If there's the least problem with filtration the sky will expose it with immediacy.
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  7. #57
    RPC
    RPC is offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    363
    Quote Originally Posted by Andre Noble View Post
    If you have the time, can you post said darkroom print/s from Ektar 100? Maybe you are right - but i seriously doubt it.

    PS: even EK knows there are undesirable characteristics of Ektar 100 and even hinted on their Facebook page that they are in the process of reformulating it.
    I see no point. I have already said, and others agree, that scans are unreliable.
    A print itself may look good, but on your screen or someone else's it may be drastically different and any judgement would be erroneous.

    As an example, to me the pics you posted have poor skin tones, and I know Fuji films are better than that. You apparentIy have applied some subjective correction. But at my end I could try to correct it but I could never make it look good, which I believe is a fault of the scan. I have experience judging skin tones as I work as a color corrector at a large photo lab. Over the years I have worked there I have seen thousand of both digital and scanned film images of people.

    I urge you to try optically printing Ektar if you have not already done so or having optical prints made from good negatives at a good lab. It is the best way to judge the film.

    As for Kodak reformulating it, this will probably affect scanning more than optical printing, since that is where the problems seem to be.

  8. #58

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,494
    Traditional color neg films put a priority on idealized skintones under a variety of lighting conditions;
    what happens to analogous hues in the process becomes a complicated issue. But folks just got used to a certain kind of rendering and the ability to be a little careless during exposure, and still
    landing on their feet. Ektar is more a film for adults. Anyone who has worked with chromes will find it
    easy. But even chromes had a lot of reproduction issues - it's just that those who prefered positives
    got used to their kind of idiosyncrasies - they actually liked the blue shadows etc and used them in
    the scenics "creatively". I doubt, Andre, that you've taken the time to explore proper use of color
    temp filter and why you can't just expect PS to post-correct every kind of roadkill. If you just don't
    like Ektar fine - use Portra - but don't go around badmouthing a product you don't quite understand.

  9. #59

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,494
    RPC - as you know, I don't scan but darkroom print. But sometimes for easy image selection, esp
    when a potential print client is involved, I will simply order up an inexpensive mid-quality scan when
    the lab does the C41 processing. The use a commercial Creo device; and they love and promote
    Ektar specifically because its scans so well. But one has to have correct exposure in the first place.
    If a particular dye layer is underexposed, one can't simply tweak color balance in PS - the whole
    geometry of individual curves would have to be restructured; and if they fall into the crossover range, it's almost impossible to retrieve them correctly. Now by crossover, I do not mean anything
    inherently wrong will the film, but with exposure method itself, so that the film doesn't do what it
    is actually engineered to do. And those dye curves in Ektar are different from Portra. Folks should
    just study the tech sheets and learn how to correctly interpret them.

  10. #60

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by DREW WILEY View Post
    JoJo - maybe it's time to learn about color temp corrections at time of exposure and about contrast masking in the darkroom.
    I already did contrast masking. But my time in darkroom is limited and if there are films which work better for me, why should I do things so complicated? Also the color issue was not solved with contrast masking.
    As I said, Fuji CA paper, which is softer than Endura VC or Ultra Endura gave much better results.

    Quote Originally Posted by RPC View Post
    I am one who prints Ektar optically. I have been printing color negatives for more than 25 years. I have printed Kodak, Fuji, Agfa and Konica films and when exposed properly, processed properly and printed on good paper all these films could produce good prints. Ektar is no different.
    What type of paper do you currently use?

    Joachim



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin