Dear Ron,

I am very sorry for my very late reply, but I have struggled with a severe illness for a very long time.

Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post

I refer you to "A review of the old and n ew methods of evaluating the image structure of color films" by M. Kriss published in the notes of the SPSE "Color: Theory and Imaging Systems" in 1972. This is an excellent reference for this topic.
Thanks, I will try to get it.
Published in 1972, almost 40 years ago, even before E6 (and C-41, if I rember right) were introduced.
Well, as I have mentioned above, the main interest of our detailed test programme are the films which are currently on the market.

Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
And, I might remind you that there have been few advances put into E6 products since the mid '90s but color negative film has continued to advance!
I agree with you concerning Kodak and Agfa, but have to disagree concerning Fuji. Fuji has made quite big steps and progress in E6 film technology during the last twenty years. They surpassed Kodak at the beginning of the '90s.
The 'Panther' film line of Kodak at that time was weak compared to Fuji films and was not accepted by the market. Fuji became market leader in slide films.
Even in the last 8 years there has been significant progress in Fuji slide films. Astia 100F, Sensia 100 (III), Velvia 100F, Velvia 100 and as the latest, only 4 years back Provia 400X. All were significantly improved compared to the former versions.
Provia 400X for example has fineness of grain and resolution on a level comparable to some ISO 100 films. E100VS / Elitechrome ExtraColor 100 deliver only a bit better detail, the difference is there but not big (the last Agfa RSX 100 was even worse than 400X). Color rendition of 400X is excellent and on the same level as ISO 100 films.
If you compare Provia 400X to the last Ektachrome 400X, well this difference is really huge. No chance at all for the Ektachrome 400X.

Kodak reached Fuji's level again in 2003 at least with their new Ektachrome E100G, E100GX and Elitechrome 100. Excellent films with comparable performance to Fuji's 100 ISO films.

Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
Ektar compared to any Ektachrome film is at least 2 -3 generations ahead in technology.
Our test results are very clear about the comparison of Ektar 100 to E100G and Elitechrome 100:

Resolution and sharpness of both slide films are much superior to Ektar 100:
Resolution with object contrast of 1:4:
E100G and Elitechrome 100: 120 - 135 Lp/mm
Ektar 100: 90 - 105 Lp/mm

Grain is a little bit finer with the Ektachromes (if you are interested I can send you some test shots, originals).

Kodak introduced Ektar 100 first only as 35mm film, and in its amateur line. And said it is optmised for scanning. It was adressed for a certain market segment.
I talked at Photokina 2008, when Ektar 100 was introduced, to the Kodak people and they told me that. Also they said there will be no Ektar 100 120 or sheet film (well, they later changed their mind).
And that is indeed what they really did: A film optimised for the most widespread amateur scanners with max. resolution of 4000 ppi.
Most of these scanners get real 3600 ppi (Nikon Coolscan 5000 e.g.), that is about 70 Lp/mm resolution.
Kodak sacrificed a bit resolution (Gold 100 has indeed about 15% higher resolution, but significantly coarser grain compared to Ektar) to get finer grain, because with these 4000 ppi scanners grain is the most visible problem (often enhanced by scanner noise).
Ektar 100 is a product specifically designed for this certain market segment, and it fits very well in this application.
But from a technological point of view and the test results, E100G, Elitechrome 100 and all ISO 100 Fuji slide films deliver better detail rendition. Visible directly on the film (see my postings above) and with drum scanners.
And when you compare a projected slide to a Ektar print of the same size.

Best regards,