Kodak Ektar 100: skin tone EI?
This is my first try at color in any film. I just bought Kodak Ektar 120 and need some advice on shooting outdoors regarding skin tones. Usually to get the skin tones in B&W in the shade I desire, I cut EI to half of what the box states.
Do I do the same for color or do I just go with box speed? BTW I am using a Fuji GSW690III with a Voigtlander II reflectance meter.
I think it depends what look you're going for, but box speed or over expose half a stop should look OK I think.
There are reports of this emulsion going blue in the shadows if underexposed or if the scene is lit from clear blue sky.
This is common with most C41 so if pleasing skin tones are what you're after, filter for this if possible and I think 1/2 to 1 stop of over exposure will cover you.
I haven't shot any Ektar yet (late to this party)but if skin was my priority I would go with a Portra.
Ektar 100 negative film (the new stuff) doesn't like over-exposure. It bleeds out and loses a number of colors. Expose at box speeds.
Ektar so far seems to do skin tones just fine, though. I'm still shooting some rolls to develop, but my test roll looked good.
Canon AE-1P 35mm | 50mm/f1.8 FDn | 28mm/2.8 FD | 70-200mm/f4-5 FD | 35-70mm/F2.8-3.5 Sigma FD
Ektar although a wonderful film and excellent for general photography it isn't the best film in the World for "skin tones" although acceptable Kodak Portra NC or Fuji Pro 160S are better for pure portraiture, having said that I would recommend with any film when shooting it for the first time should be shot at the boxed speed.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
one member here has a test with a wide range of exposures with a gray card and color checker.
Although I guess the scanning component can sway results, this film looked to be pretty forgiving.
edit: found it
From my own personal experience I would rate Ektar at 50.
The reason being when I first used the film I shot off a a couple of rolls at 100 using a variety of lighting scenarios and using both spot and incident light readings I found that the shadows were under exposed. Over exposing by one stop seems to work fine. The Russia images I have in my gallery are all shot on Ektar rated at 50 and I have made hand prints in a colour darkroom and had digital prints made both where good with no problems with printing or colour (in fact the hand printed ones looked excellent if I say so myself).
I have no problems in underexposing or overexposing Ektar. It's a bit more contrasty than the Portra family, but still remarkably high in latitude. "Bleeding out" and "losing number of colors" is typical internet nonsense. What does those words mean anyway? First define the problems. Then check your workflow first if you have such problems. With today's color neg films, including Ektar, the film most probably has recorded the scene perfectly. Start printing RA-4 if you are not a nuclear physicist enough to be able to use scanners and scanner software .
Also, OMG, shadows going blue. Come on, shadows ARE blue on sunny days. Ektar is saturation-enhancing film purposely, and by definition, like Velvia in the world of slide films. So of course it boosts blue shadows in sunny days, just like anything that boosts color saturation. If this is unwanted, select something else that does not boost saturation, like Portra 160NC or the new Portra 160.
Originally Posted by hrst
Or filter for it.
Our eyes adjust so we dont see open shade as inherently blueish even if that's what it really is.
If you filter for blue shadows, you end up having very orange non-shadows :-). This may or may not be desirable, again. You can filter between these, but if you want to avoid both, the only possibility is to reduce color saturation.
Without filters, yes, the balance is much more on the side of blue shadows than orange light parts, so you may end up at a "better" overall balance with filtering and it may be closer to human vision in some cases. But, Ektar is quite warm to begin with.
The problem has at least three aspects;
1) Our eyes adjust for overall color temperature,
2) Our eyes adjust locally for color temperature differences even in the same scene
3) Compared to our eye vision, Ektar exaggerates color saturation, increasing the difference between blue shadows and orange sunlight in sunny day.
As we all know, the difference between the color temperatures increases towards evening...
Luckily, with color neg, you can mostly do the filtering afterwards. For this purpose, overexposure is recommended. So, overexposing allows for post-compensation against blue shadows, if it is what you want. So in this regard, the internet "legend" is correct. I just wanted to point out the reasoning.