Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,910   Posts: 1,556,200   Online: 1019
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: Ektar 400?

  1. #21

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Moxom View Post
    Isn't the new Ektar 100 derived from motion picture film???
    No, it just shares the new double electron technology, just like the Portras, and even the Golds now do.

    The reason they are making the lines cross compatible, I suspect, is to save further money on coating.

    There'd be no other reason why they'd improve Portra (Portra-2) in Fall '06 and then turn around and make another improvement less than a year later were in not for the introduction of Vision3.

    Kodak just likes giving everything a positive spin like they went out and did this and that for the customer.

    It's classic consolidation with a name change to camouflage the fact.

    That's not to say that Ektar 100 isn't a good film, but I'm sure it has very little in common with the original other than similar contrast and the same name.

    I mean, is Ektar film related to the crappy Ektar 110 cameras Kodak used to make? Or is it related to Ektar lenses?

    Of course not; they're just Kodak trademarks. Kodachrome and Kodakcolor aren't related. Nor are Ektachrome and Ektapress and Ektacolor.

  2. #22
    tiberiustibz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Tufts University
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,750
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Moxom View Post
    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.
    No. It's a film similar to Ektar 25. They used the same enhancements they had in movie films to achieve a faster speed, ASA 100, without increasing the grain.

  3. #23
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,186
    Images
    65
    The 100 and the old 25 were totally different films, I'm afraid, than any that exist today.

    The 100 uses new couplers for better color rendition and image stability. It uses some of the Vision 2 and 3 technology, but also has been changed to work with the C-41 type process. Reciprocity and LIK have been changed as have the room keeping characteristics when compared to Vision film. The coupler dispersion method is totally different than the old Ektar 25. So, the formula does not resemble anything else out there very closely. You might say that it is just another color film for as much similarity there is.

    PE

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4
    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.

    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.

    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.

    riginally Posted by Andrew Moxom
    Isn't the new Ektar 100 derived from motion picture film???
    No, it just shares the new double electron technology, just like the Portras, and even the Golds now do.

    The reason they are making the lines cross compatible, I suspect, is to save further money on coating.

    There'd be no other reason why they'd improve Portra (Portra-2) in Fall '06 and then turn around and make another improvement less than a year later were in not for the introduction of Vision3.

    Kodak just likes giving everything a positive spin like they went out and did this and that for the customer.

    It's classic consolidation with a name change to camouflage the fact.

    That's not to say that Ektar 100 isn't a good film, but I'm sure it has very little in common with the original other than similar contrast and the same name.

    I mean, is Ektar film related to the crappy Ektar 110 cameras Kodak used to make? Or is it related to Ektar lenses?

    Of course not; they're just Kodak trademarks. Kodachrome and Kodakcolor aren't related. Nor are Ektachrome and Ektapress and Ektacolor.

  5. #25
    Mark Antony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    East Anglia,UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    772
    Images
    38
    No, it just shares the new double electron technology, just like the Portras, and even the Golds now do.

    I thinks that's false, I believe that Ektar 100 is the first film with 2 electron sensitisation, I'm not aware that they put this technology in Portra or Gold (I'm sure if they did theyd be trumpeting it)

    The reason they are making the lines cross compatible, I suspect, is to save further money on coating.

    Again an extremely questionable statement. Although there are some technologies borrowed from the Vision line they are not cross compatible, they have different processing, and are essentially very different emulsions I doubt they're coated on the same machines (although I can't be exactly sure)

    I'd imagine that most of Kodak R&D is in their movie product, if Kodak Research improves anything I'd imagine it goes into Vision first, because that's where the Dollars are.
    What we are seeing is improvements made in one division being applied to another when product cycles allow.
    Remember when the VR range came out? the first T grain films in the early 1980's were colour stills, it took them years to migrate that technology to B&W (colour stills were the cash cow then)- what you are seeing is a similar transition this time with a kind of trickle down to smaller volume lines from Vision tech.
    We will see 2 electron in the Portra line and possibly even mono films in the next few years.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    9
    I don't know why it wasn't advertised on the box, but the brochure for the Portra-3s definitely mentions 2 electron sensitization.

    It was first used in a movie film.

    Still films have never, at least as far back as the days of color, been improved before the movie equivalents, EVER.

  7. #27
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,186
    Images
    65
    Portra films contain 2 electron sensitization. AFAIK, the Gold family does not.

    Ektar 100 shares the 2 electron sensitization and the new cubic / t-grain technology as stated by Kodak in their promotional ads.

    The entire family of color negative films shares some components such as couplers, hardeners and etc, but the 2 electron sensitization, cubic and t-grain technology require a totally different mix of sensitizers, stabilzers and other addenda to make them work properly.

    They are all coated using the same equipment.

    Still films were improved before movie equivalents! Sorry, but this is also a fact. Until the movie industry moved away from Technicolor and other color systems, innovation at Kodak went into consumer products first, and it was not until the motion picture sales volume equaled the consumer sales that the R&D flip flopped. I can remember some pretty primitive motion picture products in the 60s compared with the consumer equivalents.

    PE

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    9
    Right. . . I said after the movie started using color [negative]

    They were still using Ektachrome from the mid '70s until they discontinued it in slo-mo cameras in 2004, so obviously the reversal films were a different story.

    We are talking about negative film here though, right? BTW, if you want to make a bet going back to Eastmancolor's becoming dominant in the industry to present for $20, you are on. . This is only for C-41 and movie negative film.
    Last edited by Blackknight603; 06-20-2009 at 04:19 PM. Click to view previous post history.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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