Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Roger's description is spot on... The film is really sensitive to exposure, but it's predictable and a great tool... Being more delicate than other color negative films when exposed, makes it odd someway... People metering with camera or in AE can end up with very different levels of saturation...
Cheers,
Juan
Cheers,
Juan
lorenzo1910
Established
Same happens to me...I'm confused...
I get fine or weird shots in the same roll...I think Portra is the best Kodak film and is cheaper than Ektar (at least here...)
HoodedOne
Well-known
First time ektar user today
Shot almost two rolls of ektar. I used my ZI with snapshot skopar 25/4 and M-hex 50/2 and some really bright and vivid subjects. Still have some shots left, so I'll try some over- and under exposure tomorrow.
Btw. Great looking pictures everybody
Shot almost two rolls of ektar. I used my ZI with snapshot skopar 25/4 and M-hex 50/2 and some really bright and vivid subjects. Still have some shots left, so I'll try some over- and under exposure tomorrow.
Btw. Great looking pictures everybody
Last edited:
totifoto
Well-known
Thanx for all the reply, think I´m understanding this film a little better now
It might be this under/over exposure thing that has been bothering me. And maybe the Zeiss lens is too clinical for this film.
The Lomo camera has auto shutter and aperture and it is spot on about 80-90% of my rolls. Using the Leica on the other hand I have to adjust these things myself and using the very forgiving Tri-x most of the time I might have to think more when using the Ektar.
Another thing that bothers me about this film might be that it gives kinda digital look when scanned, no grain
When I shoot film I want it to have a film look
I´m gonna try the Portra next for my Leica, I have only shot Portra through a Hasselbald and it came out very nice.
But I´m glad that its not just me that thinks the Ektar is strange
It might be this under/over exposure thing that has been bothering me. And maybe the Zeiss lens is too clinical for this film.
The Lomo camera has auto shutter and aperture and it is spot on about 80-90% of my rolls. Using the Leica on the other hand I have to adjust these things myself and using the very forgiving Tri-x most of the time I might have to think more when using the Ektar.
Another thing that bothers me about this film might be that it gives kinda digital look when scanned, no grain
When I shoot film I want it to have a film look
I´m gonna try the Portra next for my Leica, I have only shot Portra through a Hasselbald and it came out very nice.
But I´m glad that its not just me that thinks the Ektar is strange
TareqPhoto
The Survivor
Ektar 100 is my favorite color negative film, Velvia 50/100F both are my favorite color slide film.
yesterday i was shooting with 4 color films [2 negs and 2 slides] then added 2 more at the end of the day [evening], i sent the first 4 to the lab in the afternoon and got it later same day evening, the Velvia 100F was the best of all, the other slide [E100G] was processed as C-41 for crosss processing but i didn't like the results at all [still trying to find out what's the problem], the other 2 negs were both expired and i used them for test, the Reala was better colors for me than Pro160S, and i really wish if that Reala is still available, but Ektar will take care of that for me.
All films are in 120mm, i don't shoot 35mm yet.
yesterday i was shooting with 4 color films [2 negs and 2 slides] then added 2 more at the end of the day [evening], i sent the first 4 to the lab in the afternoon and got it later same day evening, the Velvia 100F was the best of all, the other slide [E100G] was processed as C-41 for crosss processing but i didn't like the results at all [still trying to find out what's the problem], the other 2 negs were both expired and i used them for test, the Reala was better colors for me than Pro160S, and i really wish if that Reala is still available, but Ektar will take care of that for me.
All films are in 120mm, i don't shoot 35mm yet.
StaaleS
Established
I really like Ektar, but like many others find that it is finicky with regards to exposure. I tend to think of it as a slide film that just happens to be negative. It takes a brave man to sunny-sixteen it, that is for sure.
Tim Gray
Well-known
I've grossly overexposed Ektar and it came out useable. Perhaps even a desired look if thats what you want. I find it more flexible than it is sometimes made out to be.
That being said, I find I like Portra WAY more. 400NC and 400VC are fabulous films. So are the the 160's and 800. I like the colors I get more out of them, and Ektar's biggest selling point in my mind (lack of grain) isn't that big of a deal to me. Saturation can be tweaked a bit in photoshop, which lets me get a little extra oomph if I need it out of Portra.
That being said, I find I like Portra WAY more. 400NC and 400VC are fabulous films. So are the the 160's and 800. I like the colors I get more out of them, and Ektar's biggest selling point in my mind (lack of grain) isn't that big of a deal to me. Saturation can be tweaked a bit in photoshop, which lets me get a little extra oomph if I need it out of Portra.
mackigator
Well-known
I'm in the club with those getting inconsistent results from Ektar, often on the same roll. My conclusion so far: this film needs lots of light. It doesn't seem to like underexposure very much at all.
I also like 400NC a lot, esp in 120.
I also like 400NC a lot, esp in 120.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
Well, I just shot another roll, with exposures that I know to range from -1 to +0.5 or so. We'll see soon enough.
wayneb
Established
Here's Ektar at magic hour...
maggieo
More Deadly
Here's Ektar at magic hour...
Wayne, that's gorgeous! What corner is that? Looks vaguely familiar to me.
totifoto
Well-known
I have to give the 120 a try as well, maybe I like that better
But i just bought two rolls of Portra today, one 160NC and on 400NC, 20 bucks. I hate living in Iceland sometimes.
But i just bought two rolls of Portra today, one 160NC and on 400NC, 20 bucks
. I hate living in Iceland sometimes.
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
I have to give the 120 a try as well, maybe I like that better
But i just bought two rolls of Portra today, one 160NC and on 400NC, 20 bucks
Same price here in Spain...
Cheers,
Juan
swatch
Established
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
That approach doesn't work for me at all. Different people meter in different ways, and the effective film speed will consequently be different for different photographers.
In my hands, after two rolls, underexposed Ektar just looks underexposed. If I treat it like a 100 speed emulsion, I get good results. If I don't, I don't. Too bad -- I'd love to be able to treat it as ISO 160 here in dark, dark Seattle.
Last edited:
healyzh
Well-known
Ektar 100 is my favorite colour film. Having said that, it is also a very frustrating film. Underexpose it and the colours are horrible. Give it lots of sunlight and over expose it and it is fantastic.
I started shooting it in 35mm, when they brought it out in 120, I bought a Hasselblad. I've yet to shoot it in 4x5, but bought a box of 10 sheets the last time I bought film. Unfortunately the outing I bought it for didn't happen, and I'm not sure I'll bother with a LF camera on my next outing.
I find I get the best results with Ektar 100 when shooting with the Hasselblad in blindingly bright sunlight. That is when the film really "shines" for me. Honestly, as much as I love the film, I find it more than a little frustrating!
I started shooting it in 35mm, when they brought it out in 120, I bought a Hasselblad. I've yet to shoot it in 4x5, but bought a box of 10 sheets the last time I bought film. Unfortunately the outing I bought it for didn't happen, and I'm not sure I'll bother with a LF camera on my next outing.
I find I get the best results with Ektar 100 when shooting with the Hasselblad in blindingly bright sunlight. That is when the film really "shines" for me. Honestly, as much as I love the film, I find it more than a little frustrating!
J J Kapsberger
Well-known
Shot at ISO 100:
This is contre jour in a way. The subject's on the south side of the east-west running street (so he's lit by north light). The background in the window is fully lit by the sun.
I exposed, using my hand-held incident meter, for the north light. As you can see, this film has remarkable exposure latitude and tonal range.
This is contre jour in a way. The subject's on the south side of the east-west running street (so he's lit by north light). The background in the window is fully lit by the sun.
I exposed, using my hand-held incident meter, for the north light. As you can see, this film has remarkable exposure latitude and tonal range.
Last edited:
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
When it works, I really like it. Two snapshots from Kyoto, both with the ZM 35/2.8 Biogon-C.
Last edited:
J J Kapsberger
Well-known
I'm sold on Ektar.
Tim Gray
Well-known
Nice shot JJ. Though the colors look a bit strange over here. A bit blue in the shadows and a bit magenta in the skin. It is something that is totally correctable. I think the 'Ektar has strange colors' comments come from mostly post issues and how it is corrected.