Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 76,315   Posts: 1,681,917   Online: 840
      
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 34
  1. #1
    zenza's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    30

    new ektar 100 vs 160vc?

    Hello fellow shooters,

    I've been looking into trying some of the new Ektar 100 in 120 format and was curious as to how it compares to the 160vc film. For one, I'm a big fan of E100VS and was hoping that the Ektar 100 was more or less like it but in negative film-form. I guess my main concern is how it is in comparison to 160vc because I didn't like the results from that film at all.

    Any help or opinions are appreciated

  2. #2
    stradibarrius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Monroe, GA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,382
    Images
    163
    My experience with both 120 and 35mm are very good, but the only way you will know is to try it yourself. I have only shot one roll of 160VC in 120 and it was good but Ektar100 is better IMHO.
    "Generalizations are made because they are generally true"
    Flicker http://www.flickr.com/photos/stradibarrius
    website: http://www.dudleyviolins.com
    Barry
    Monroe, GA

  3. #3
    Ektagraphic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Southeastern Massachusetts
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,879
    Images
    23
    160VC is good, but I think Ektar has a touch of the look of a transparency. Ektar is pretty good by negative can't even touch the quality of slides, so I would stick to E100VS
    Helping to save analog photography one exposure at a time

  4. #4
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,100
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Ektagraphic View Post
    ...can't even touch the quality of slides...
    Silly Ektagraphic. That's a good one. Should be in the joke thread. :rolleyes:
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  5. #5
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    24,672
    Images
    65
    I wish I could give a course in photo engineering to you guys. It would show you the problems inherent in slide films.

    PE

  6. #6
    mts
    mts is offline
    mts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    350
    Images
    125
    Not to mention that C41 is a breeze to process and relatively easy to print. E6 is in my opinion a PITA to process and nowhere near as predictable as to result. I have a dozen rolls of each waiting to process and have found myself shooting black & white LF in the last few weeks. I would like to audit your short course when you decide to make it a webinar.
    By denying the facts, any paradox can be sustained--Galileo

  7. #7
    MikeSeb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Prospect (Louisville), KY, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,062
    I think that Ektar 100 is going to displace Portra 160VC, though I'll continue to use 400VC. My other "standard' films are Fuji 160S and 400H; these last two are my everyday "neutral' go-to's.

    Portra VC and Ektar are both vibrant films; it's hard to describe the difference, but I'd say that the Ektar is just...more saturated. Even though the VC is vibrant, it seems a bit cooler---maybe---and not as saturated as Ektar.

    You really gotta just try them. Ektar is a fabulous film.
    Michael Sebastian
    Website | Blog

  8. #8
    Ektagraphic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Southeastern Massachusetts
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,879
    Images
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by markbarendt View Post
    Silly Ektagraphic. That's a good one. Should be in the joke thread. :rolleyes:
    I am serious
    Helping to save analog photography one exposure at a time

  9. #9
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    24,672
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Ektagraphic View Post
    I am serious
    But wrong!

    Color slide film is not as good as color negative film. The reasons are extensive and quite technical and I cannot seem to get through to people.

    They think slide films are better because they can "read" them visually.

    PE

  10. #10
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,100
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Ektagraphic View Post
    I am serious
    Transparencies and negatives are different animals.

    As far as color and quality go the biggest problem I've seen with negatives is actually digital.

    Most labs scan to print. The quality of the scan and processing they apply is the weak link.

    That doesn't mean the film or C-41system is bad, it means you need to talk with your lab or maybe try a new lab.
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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