Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,546   Posts: 1,573,004   Online: 849
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: Ektar 400?

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by stealthman_1 View Post
    I'd prefer they used the new technology to come out with a new Ektar 25...
    Grand Teton National Park, Kodak Ektar 25, 120 format, expired 1992, shot May, 2009.
    Is that heavy blue cast produced in scanning, or is it the old film?

    Anyway, if the new Ektar (have yet to try it myself) produced results equal to that of the 25, why would we need an 25 ISO version again?

    I would hate to find that the Ektar is anything like Portra UC. VC is over the top already.
    So possibly "yes" to a 400 version, but please make it nothing like UC!
    Last edited by Q.G.; 06-14-2009 at 09:11 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  2. #12
    Mark Antony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    East Anglia,UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    772
    Images
    38
    I find the new Ektar to have similar or better grain than the old 25 ASA version, probably a new 2 electron 25 would give grain free 16x20" from 35mm and I'm guessing that what some would like.
    I'd say I'd much rather have a 400 or even 3200 version as in the UK a slow film is of limited value with MF and the inevitable dull British weather-although its sunny at the moment
    Yes Kodak give me a 3200 with the grain of a 400 not too high saturation so I can shoot in the darker places

  3. #13

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    39
    Or they could just slap the Ektar name on a marginally improved UC400, like they did with UC100. . .

    We all know that Eastman Kodak company has mastered the art of spinning.

  4. #14
    stealthman_1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Northern California
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by Q.G. View Post
    Is that heavy blue cast produced in scanning, or is it the old film?

    Anyway, if the new Ektar (have yet to try it myself) produced results equal to that of the 25, why would we need an 25 ISO version again?
    There is no blue cast, that's the blue/silver light of mid-afternoon in the mountains with thirteen miles of air to look through. The RGB values of the snow in the glacial fields are identical as scanned and with blue saturation at 0.

    Why 25? Because two film stops is a big deal with some subjects. The shutter speed in EV15 light a f22 is 1/60 with ISO100 media. ISO 25 gets you to 1/15, and a 3 stop ND, which are common, get you to 1/2, which will blur water nicely. Other wise you start stacking NDs or you need to have a B&W 6 or 10 stop ND and those aren't cheap or common.
    Of course one would also hope for tighter grain.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by stealthman_1 View Post
    There is no blue cast, that's the blue/silver light of mid-afternoon in the mountains with thirteen miles of air to look through. The RGB values of the snow in the glacial fields are identical as scanned and with blue saturation at 0.
    Nah. That is definitely a blue cast.
    Thirteen miles of air are not between you and the vegetation in the foreground.
    The snow too is blue, the white in the clouds is blue. Everything is blue.

    I have taken the liberty of tuning it towards neutral (just give a shout and the image disappears again). See how the miles between you and the mountains still colour them blue, but not the green in the foreground?





    So if scanned with blue set to neutral, the scanner needs calibrating.


    But what matters is how you like it. So no problem.

  6. #16
    Chazzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    South Bend, IN, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,873
    Images
    5
    I'm not psychic, but I would think that if Kodak introduces another Ektar product, it would be 400 speed or faster, not 25 speed. Medium speed emulsions are now so good, and Ektar 100 is already so fine-grained, that only a relatively small percentage of miniature format users would want something even finer. The obvious solution for someone who wants less grain from the 135 version of Ektar 100 is to move up to the 120 version. I suspect that the number of shooters who want a slower Ektar so that they can use slow shutter speeds with water is also very small. But I am happy to leave the marketing research to Kodak.
    Charles Hohenstein

  7. #17

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    39
    The slowest film makes is a 50-speed movie film, so I don't see them going below that ever again.

    Probably 100 is the slowest we'll see ever again. Still 2/3 of a stop slower than Portra, now that they got rid of the 100T they used to make.

  8. #18
    tiberiustibz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Tufts University
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,750
    Images
    5
    A couple thoughts: the current ektar 100 in 35mm gives me mas-o-menos grain free 11x14s. That's pretty amazing. I'm sure it would go to 16x20s with minimal grain but I don't have trays large enough to process those and I haven't yet mastered wrestling large paper sheets in the dark. My epiphany was to realize that I should stop whining about the products kodak doesn't make and admire the beauty of the ones they do.

    Ektar is a neutral balanced film. Overcast conditions will yield a slight blue cast. As I recall, the ektar 25 scans really weirdly, requiring color correction. Anyways, they both enlarge fine...

    I think a microfilm asa 25 style film would be cool, new, and interesting but you're dealing with the limits of the resolution of the glass. I don't really care about a 400 speed landscape film, personally.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    39
    Ektar is neutral balanced, but it's high contrast. So, if you don't like VC, or UC, you'll probably not like the "New Ektar". It's not the same as an improved 100UC would've been, but it's pretty close.

    Honestly, if one were to shoot 100UC and Ektar, and do a double-blind test, I bet nine out of ten (including myself as one of those nine) wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

  10. #20
    Andrew Moxom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Keeping the British end up in Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,871
    Images
    333
    Isn't the new Ektar 100 derived from motion picture film??? If a 400 speed Movie film was available, I suspect it might be something they could make in 120 or 35mm formats. Then again, I know nothing about the movie business or materials used for it.

    That said, I doubt they would develop it especially for smaller format use first. It makes no business sense.
    Please check out my website www.amoxomphotography.com and APUG Portfolio .....

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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