Switch to English Language Passer en langue franšaise Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 74,637   Posts: 1,648,317   Online: 1189
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25

Thread: Ektar 400?

  1. #1
    BetterSense's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Carolina
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,979

    Ektar 400?

    Doesn't it seem like Kodak could apply the technology behind Ektar 100 to a faster film, kind of like how we have TMX and TMY?

    Has anyone tried pushing Ektar 100 or simply underexposing it a couple stops?

    What do you use it for; is it suitable for portraits; how much finer grain is it than say, Portra 160?
    f/22 and be there.

  2. #2
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    24,374
    Images
    65
    Ektar 400 would be an entirely feasible product if there was a proven market. It would take about 1 - 5 years of R&D depending on the people available and the projects in development. Of course, the ROI would have to support the R&D effort.

    It would take at least 1 - 2 new emulsions / layer and the existing couplers could probably be used. The system would have to be rebalanced.

    PE

  3. #3
    GrantR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    58
    Images
    16
    I tried pushing some Ektar100 two stops--and it looks simply ridiculous. I felt that the contrast and saturation just got a little out of hand. I could see it looking acceptable perhaps under certain low contrast lighting conditions, but I, myself, will probably never do it again. I'll post some examples here if I can find the negatives.

  4. #4
    Mark Antony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    East Anglia,UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    772
    Images
    38
    I underexposed Ektar by 2 stops and got OK results:
    http://photo-utopia.blogspot.com/200...ektar-100.html

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    963
    I used to use Portra 400 UC until it was discontinued. I switched to 400 NC, not VC, and was amazed at the results. Maybe we have really good alternatives until 400 Ektar comes along...

  6. #6
    stealthman_1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Northern California
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    91
    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.

    Linky to 1000pixel version

  7. #7
    benjiboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    U.K.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    7,800
    I guess the future Ektar films will depend on how well the existing range sell, and if Kodak think It's worth their while spending the money on the R&D on extending the available range.
    Last edited by benjiboy; 06-14-2009 at 05:38 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    Ben

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,682
    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 08:11 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  9. #9
    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

  10. #10

    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.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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