Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,973   Posts: 1,558,713   Online: 758
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35
  1. #21
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,372
    Images
    20
    In response to the original question, invest in a couple of rolls of film and you'll have your answer, but my impression is that Ektar 100 has better saturation and finer grain than 160VC. I think 160VC is too close in tonality to 160NC to be that interesting, while 160NC makes a great film for portraits or other situations where you might want a more neutral color palette.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  2. #22
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,614
    Images
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    The orange mask is NOT uniform. It forms a very weak orange positive image to perform its function as a mask.
    That answers something which I had always wondered about.

    I thought that if it were uniform it may as well not be there and could be filtered out in printing. Possibly even easier in scanning.

    I seem to recall my father telling me about an early Agfa colour negative film without an orange base but I can't remember what it was now.


    Steve.
    "People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.

  3. #23
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,228
    Images
    65
    Agfa had a whole family of unmasked negative films in the 60s and earlier. Konica and Fuji also had similar products. They used a long wash after the color developer step to introduce interimage effects in a pseudo masking process which used fogging to accentuate the color correction. In a sense, E6 uses this as well.

    PE

  4. #24
    RPC
    RPC is offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    390
    But isn't it the case that the image formed by the mask, and the image formed by the dye impurities, are opposites of one another and together form an orange color which is uniform all over the image then filtered out during printing?

  5. #25
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,228
    Images
    65
    The sum total of the positive masking dye images and the negative unwanted dye images is a constant orange. You are correct in that sense. The mask itself is a positive record of the unwanted absorptions of the imaging dyes.

    The actual correction can be detected spectrophotometrically, but not visually. And, this is only due to the fact that the colored couplers are not perfect themselves.

    I hope this clarifies things. In a way, we are both right depending on the POV.

    Thanks for phrasing it more clearly than I did.

    PE

  6. #26
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,614
    Images
    122
    Just to stray off-topic for a moment longer, Does Kodak's C41 black and white film have an orange base because it is optomised for printing on colour paper whereas Ilford's has a clear base for traditional monochrome printing?

    Or is there more to it than that?


    Steve.
    "People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Central NC
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    444
    It's nice spin. But spin it is IMHO.

    Besides being an LF photographer who has shot many a box of 5x4 color negative and B&W film, I'm also a drum scanner operator. If you have the right equipment, software, and experience, drum scanning color negative is little different than scanning trannies. But the wrong equipment, software, and experience can make scanning negatives a serious PITA.

    That, I think, is WCI's problem. They have a Heidelberg Tango drum scanner and its Linocolor/Newcolor software. I've never driven a Tango scanner, so I'm just repeating what I've read and heard over the years from other scanner operators, but what I've heard is that the Tango and it's software are highly optimized for scanning tranny films. It was marketed almost exclusively to pre-press houses for advertising and magazine work. And that market was exclusively tranny. The reason for that is art directors -- they demand WYSIWYG. Scanning negatives with a Tango is supposed to be, well, awful. I've never heard an Heidelberg operator say a good thing about negative film.

    There were however scanners aimed at a more general market that have hardware and software that are considerably more negative friendly. The old Optronics ColorGetters I can personally attest to. All I shoot is negative film (color and B&W), and my ColorGetter 3Pro runs all of my film just beautifully. And the current Aztek scanners and DPL software also make color negative work easy from what I hear.

    All I'm saying is that WCI is protecting their investment and trying to make things easier for WCI. Who can blame them for that? That WCI discourages their customers from using negative films because WCI can't scan them well or easily is only a reflection on WCI. In my experience it doesn't have anything to do with the strengths and weaknesses of the films themselves. And it shouldn't have any effect (although I'm sure it does) on photographers choosing the film that works best for what they are trying to achieve.

    PE is right when he says that color negative material is superior to tranny material in a bunch of different ways. I've seen it over and over and over again.
    Bruce Watson
    AchromaticArts.com

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Utah, United States
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    92
    Quote Originally Posted by David A. Goldfarb View Post
    In response to the original question, invest in a couple of rolls of film and you'll have your answer, but my impression is that Ektar 100 has better saturation and finer grain than 160VC. I think 160VC is too close in tonality to 160NC to be that interesting, while 160NC makes a great film for portraits or other situations where you might want a more neutral color palette.
    I think David's spot on. Ektar 100 is a lovely film IMO (I've only used 120) at 2/3 the price of 160vc. Definitely try some.

  9. #29
    Chazzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    South Bend, IN, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,865
    Images
    5
    I would hate to see Ektar 100 replace Portra 160 VC. The new Ektar film is just too saturated for my taste in most situations. I hope that Kodak can sell both films.
    Charles Hohenstein

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by mbsmith View Post
    Ektar 100 is a lovely film IMO (I've only used 120) at 2/3 the price of 160vc.
    I pay about 10% more for Ektar than i pay for Portra :o

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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