Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,689   Posts: 1,548,773   Online: 1258
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 40
  1. #21
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    For what you describe, Portra 160VC or Fuji Pro 160C. Try some Ektar too, so you can see how different it is.

    FWIW, there is probably one thing I would seriously use Ektar for, and this is standalone products (i.e. with no people in the shot). I cannot stand the way it renders the average scene. It seems to be a few crayons short of a complete set to me. It looks like an amateur film to my eyes when used for people and landscapes. I noticed very bold, blocked up primaries, a lack of subtlety in the way it renders color differences, and a very sharp drop off in detail as you move into the shadows of the image. I use it when I want its look, but I would not consider it a good choice for a general purpose film for most types of photography.
    Last edited by 2F/2F; 09-29-2010 at 05:23 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by mikecnichols View Post
    I haven't used this newer Ektar. I have used the Ultra Color line and was very un happy for the most part. There were a few shots that I am very happy with, but overall I was unimpressed.
    I was also very unimpressed by Ugly Colour.

    I have given Ektar a fair chance, and it left me as unimpressed as UC, for the same reasons: too much contrast, ugly colour.

  3. #23
    mikecnichols's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Marion, VA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    345
    Images
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by Q.G. View Post
    I was also very unimpressed by Ugly Colour.

    I have given Ektar a fair chance, and it left me as unimpressed as UC, for the same reasons: too much contrast, ugly colour.
    The shot I have attached is the best shot from my usage of UC. I still wish that the tree trunk had better blacks, but it isn't too awful. As the other person was saying, I think it is the latitude of the Kodak films I've used that I don't like. I'm used to the way Fuji reacts and so I guess I can get disappointed easily with Kodak films....anyway, I just wanted to see peoples' opinions on the subject.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 35.JPG  

  4. #24
    ruilourosa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Portugal
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    302
    i usually use cheap film from a supermarket called shlecker and sometimes from Lidl, the film is almos certainly old agfa, from both of them! is normal saturated and in 200 ISO has an appealing grain! with dignan divided c-41 it has a little bit less speed but in normal c-41 is ok, i usually develop a bit longer since most of the times i find appealing some colour shift and more saturation!

    you can find that almost all films work ok, Ektar is great as is Portra or fuji´s 160 pro s or c! s for softer and c for contrastier

    good development and carefull exposure make better films even better


    Rui Lourosa
    vive la resistance!

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    26
    Images
    1
    Mike,
    that picture is very good. I really enjoyed looking at it.
    I have a group on another website for Ektar portraits. Some are very good and interesting although not "traditional" but it is nice to have another medium to express oneself.

  6. #26
    mikecnichols's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Marion, VA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    345
    Images
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by Sysygy View Post
    Mike,
    that picture is very good. I really enjoyed looking at it.
    I have a group on another website for Ektar portraits. Some are very good and interesting although not "traditional" but it is nice to have another medium to express oneself.
    Thanks....the more muted colors really work on it I think...especially with the tree trunk, but that's where I wish the blacks were a little blacker. Detail is nice, but the grayish hue in the blacks taint it a bit. Oh well I guess. I've never gotten into portraits myself other than some random ones as they occur naturally, usually at area cultural festivals where people are doing things from the area's heritage like making Apple butter and molasses.

  7. #27
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Fuji 160s, or reala if you can find any.
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central Florida, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,923
    Thanks everybody. I picked up few rolls of Ektar to get started. I'll have to see how it will look.
    Develop, stop, fix.... wait.... where's my film?

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central Florida, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,923
    Well.... I'm back.

    Took 3 rolls of Ektar and shot mostly landscape/fall foliage type. Is it true that Ektar is sensitive to exposure variations, ie. less tolerant of exposure errors? It's rather hard to judge because I'm looking at scanned results but seems colors are extreme in some areas and washed out in others. Rendering of people's skin were very unusual. Not bad for first time trying a particular film I guess.... anyway, that was my result.
    Last edited by tkamiya; 12-15-2010 at 08:42 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    Develop, stop, fix.... wait.... where's my film?

  10. #30
    kb3lms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Reading, PA USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    699
    Images
    5
    Yes, agreed. I do really like Ektar but it can be very touchy on skin tones and is less tolerant of exposure errors, at least that is my finding from some rolls this fall. If you do some of your own RA-4 printing, I got some very nice results with Ektar on Fuji CA Type C. In general, though, I would say it is not a film for people, it is a film for things. Kind of like Velvia.

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