Ektachrome E100 Image Thread!

I'm having a hard time scanning my second roll. They look good when I look at them with a loupe, but when I preview the scans, they are pretty dark. I have to pump up the levels a lot to get it close to the actual brightness. (epson v700) I don't have much issue with negative film. Kind of a bummer..
 
bhop73 said:
I'm having a hard time scanning my second roll. They look good when I look at them with a loupe, but when I preview the scans, they are pretty dark. I have to pump up the levels a lot to get it close to the actual brightness. (epson v700) I don't have much issue with negative film. Kind of a bummer..
Click to expand...

I agree I have very little trouble with negative film. More with E-6: try this. It is for negative film but I use a V500 which has the same software. Just use positive film instead for negative film also set it on color correction, or PM me if you have a problem:

http://www.coltonallen.com/getting-the-most-from-color-negative-film-with-your-epson-flatbed/
 
bhop73 said:
I'm having a hard time scanning my second roll. They look good when I look at them with a loupe, but when I preview the scans, they are pretty dark. I have to pump up the levels a lot to get it close to the actual brightness. (epson v700) I don't have much issue with negative film. Kind of a bummer..
Click to expand...

The reason is that transparency film has a greater density range than negative film. What that means is that the darkest parts of a slide are a lot darker (less light passes through) than the darkest areas of a negative. Negatives are much lower in contrast than slides.

Inexpensive scanners, like the Epson flatbeds, have trouble scanning high density range images. That's why scans from negatives look good but scans from transparencies have poor shadow detail.

True film scanners like the Nikon 8000ED that I use handle transparencies far better than flatbeds, but even they have trouble with some images.
 
charjohncarter said:
I finished scanning my first roll of Ektachrome 100 (new). I used a Pentax P3n with a center-weighted meter, ISO was 100, processed by Blue Moon Camera and Machine.

My P3n has proven to be a good meter, so my slides should have been right on, but the all seemed to be 1/2 stop underexposed. It is also troubling with even a slight under exposure whites are easily blow. In a well exposed scene any shadow area drops off quickly. I like the color rendition, but I'm going to have to be careful with scene choice.

These were taken either at 34 degrees latitude or 45 degrees latitude the last two weeks of October 2018.
Click to expand...

Lovely blues!!!

Thank you for those images, John, there is a lot to learn from those. I am happy to see the sky color and overall well-balanced colors without over-saturation. :)

My last roll of Velvia turned out pretty nice but even with a bit of work in OS and LR, I think the results from the new E100 would have been preferable, and I say that even though I use high saturation a lot of the time, depending of course on the subject.
 
bhop73 said:
I'm having a hard time scanning my second roll. They look good when I look at them with a loupe, but when I preview the scans, they are pretty dark. I have to pump up the levels a lot to get it close to the actual brightness. (epson v700) I don't have much issue with negative film. Kind of a bummer..
Click to expand...

The problem is not the film, it is the scanner:
Flatbed scanners are the worst technology for using film. They are the imaging chain with by far the lowest quality you get from film: Extremey low resolution, they cannot record higher Dmax (shadow detail lost), they cannot fully record the whole color gamut.
We should not forget that flatbed scanners were originally designed for office use: Scanning of papers and text. That has always been their main purpose. Not photography, not film scanning. That is only a "side business".

To get the best quality from film we should use instead the imaging chains with the highest quality. The quality ranks in the following order:
1. Slide projection with excellent projection lenses (and excellent slide loupes).
On the same first class level:
1. Optical enlarging (darkroom) with APO enlarging lenses.
Second best option:
2. Drum scanners.
Third best option:
3. Minilab scanners like Noritsu HS-1800 (by the way: The Noritsu is much better for scanning transparencies than the Fuji SP 3000).
Fourth best option:
4. Real film scanners for home use, like Nikon Coolscan 9000, Coolscan 5000, Coolscan V.
Fith best option:
5. Cheaper real film scanners like Plustek 8200 etc.
Worst option:
6. Flatbed scanners.

For the first step using slides I recommend using a good lightbox, e.g. from Kaiser http://kaiser-fototechnik.de/en/produkte/2_1_sortiment.asp?w=381
and an excellent loupe, e.g. for 35mm the Schneider-Kreuznach 4x, the Rodenstock 4x. the Leica 5x, the EMO 5x or the Peak Anastigmat 4x.
And in a second step slide projection:
Unsurpassed in resolution, color brillance and 3D effect. And unsurpassed in its extremely low costs: You get the perfect quality almost for free, because even the best projectors and lenses are available at very low prices on the used market.
 
I've shot my first Ektachrome rolls under various conditions.
And I have also did one first direct comparison test to Provia 100F.
My results so far:
1. Ektachrome E100 has very natural, neutral colors.
2. The blue of the sky is very good and better compared to the former E100G (which had a light tendency towards cyan, like unfortunately also all Kodak CN films).
3. Provia 100F seems slightly warmer (more saturated yellow and orange) than E100, E100 is a bit more on the cool side.
4. Provia 100F is sharper than E100 (that has also been the case with former E100G and E100VS). That is also confirmed by the data sheets and MTF curves of both films.
5. Provia has a bit higher resolution.
6. Fineness of grain is equal between both films.
7. Provia 100F has more exposure latitude (a result also "The Darkroom Lab" reported recently about their tests).

charjohncarter said:
I finished scanning my first roll of Ektachrome 100 (new). I used a Pentax P3n with a center-weighted meter, ISO was 100, processed by Blue Moon Camera and Machine.

My P3n has proven to be a good meter, so my slides should have been right on, but the all seemed to be 1/2 stop underexposed. It is also troubling with even a slight under exposure whites are easily blow. In a well exposed scene any shadow area drops off quickly. I like the color rendition, but I'm going to have to be careful with scene choice.
Click to expand...

That is very interesing, because I have a similar experience:
I've shot E100 and Provia 100F side by side in two identical cameras with identical metering (and the same lens): The Provia 100F shots have all been perfectly exposed, wheras the E100 shots came out a bit darker with less shadow detail. As if the E100 is not an ISO 100/21° film, but more an ISO 80/20° film.
I will do further tests on this to evaluate.
 
Skiff said:
The problem is not the film, it is the scanner:
Flatbed scanners are the worst technology for using film. They are the imaging chain with by far the lowest quality you get from film: Extremey low resolution, they cannot record higher Dmax (shadow detail lost), they cannot fully record the whole color gamut.
We should not forget that flatbed scanners were originally designed for office use: Scanning of papers and text. That has always been their main purpose. Not photography, not film scanning. That is only a "side business".

To get the best quality from film we should use instead the imaging chains with the highest quality. The quality ranks in the following order:
1. Slide projection with excellent projection lenses (and excellent slide loupes).
On the same first class level:
1. Optical enlarging (darkroom) with APO enlarging lenses.
Second best option:
2. Drum scanners.
Third best option:
3. Minilab scanners like Noritsu HS-1800 (by the way: The Noritsu is much better for scanning transparencies than the Fuji SP 3000).
Fourth best option:
4. Real film scanners for home use, like Nikon Coolscan 9000, Coolscan 5000, Coolscan V.
Fith best option:
5. Cheaper real film scanners like Plustek 8200 etc.
Worst option:
6. Flatbed scanners.

For the first step using slides I recommend using a good lightbox, e.g. from Kaiser http://kaiser-fototechnik.de/en/produkte/2_1_sortiment.asp?w=381
and an excellent loupe, e.g. for 35mm the Schneider-Kreuznach 4x, the Rodenstock 4x. the Leica 5x, the EMO 5x or the Peak Anastigmat 4x.
And in a second step slide projection:
Unsurpassed in resolution, color brilliance and 3D effect. And unsurpassed in its extremely low costs: You get the perfect quality almost for free, because even the best projectors and lenses are available at very low prices on the used market.
Click to expand...

7. I haven't tried this but: what if you ask your lab to do a 5x7 print and then scan it on flatbed. This will probably improve dynamic range at the cost of sharpness
 
arseniii said:
7. I haven't tried this but: what if you ask your lab to do a 5x7 print and then scan it on flatbed. This will probably improve dynamic range at the cost of sharpness
Click to expand...

With a print I already have the superior quality. Why destroying that by looking at a picture on the worst viewing medium, the computer monitor?

Honestly, we live in weird times:
Most photographers pay thousands of bucks for 24, 35 or 45 MP cameras, and then pay another several hundreds for a computer monitor with a 2k (2MP) or 4k (8MP) resolution which destroys the original resolution of their camera.
If you look at your picture from your D850 with 45 MP on a 4k monitor you are looking only at an 8 MP image, and nothing more! The original 45 MP are then irrelevant.
Going this imaging chain means wasting most of your money you've invested in your camera.

Same is valid for film photographers using excellent films, than using (cheap) scanners and only viewing it on computer monitors. You loose most of the original quality.
And the quality problem with computer monitors is not only their extremely low resolution, but also the limited color gamut and that they cannot show real continuous tones (because of the discrete LCD structure).
But slides, optical prints and laser prints on silver-halide RA-4 paper don't have all these quality limitations.

I want the best quality from my negatives, transparencies and digital files. Therefore I avoid to destroy the original quality by using computer monitor view as the end result.
- My digital files are printed on real photo paper (silver-halide) with high quality laser printer systems (by professional labs).
- My negatives are printed by me in my own darkroom optically the traditional way.
- Slides are projected with the best projection lenses in unsurpassed quality. It is like "cinema at home", but the quality is even much better compared to the low resolution digital projection in today's cinemas (which is also only 4k).
And slides are viewed with my outstanding slides loupes, giving me also a much better quality than any picture on a computer monitor.
- If I want one of my slides hanging as a print on the wall a drum scan from the slide is made and then printed on silver-halide RA-4 paper. The quality is outstanding.
 
Skiff said:
I've shot my first Ektachrome rolls under various conditions.
And I have also did one first direct comparison test to Provia 100F.
My results so far:
1. Ektachrome E100 has very natural, neutral colors.
2. The blue of the sky is very good and better compared to the former E100G (which had a light tendency towards cyan, like unfortunately also all Kodak CN films).
3. Provia 100F seems slightly warmer (more saturated yellow and orange) than E100, E100 is a bit more on the cool side.
4. Provia 100F is sharper than E100 (that has also been the case with former E100G and E100VS). That is also confirmed by the data sheets and MTF curves of both films.
5. Provia has a bit higher resolution.
6. Fineness of grain is equal between both films.
7. Provia 100F has more exposure latitude (a result also "The Darkroom Lab" reported recently about their tests).

That is very interesing, because I have a similar experience:
I've shot E100 and Provia 100F side by side in two identical cameras with identical metering (and the same lens): The Provia 100F shots have all been perfectly exposed, whereas the E100 shots came out a bit darker with less shadow detail. As if the E100 is not an ISO 100/21° film, but more an ISO 80/20° film.
I will do further tests on this to evaluate.
Click to expand...

Thanks Skiff, I was thinking of going to 80 also. I'd like to know your results. I'm going to be out of commission for about 3 week recovering so you will probably shoot a roll before me.
 
I shoot slides just to view with a loupe - I've accepted it

That dark forest pic does not do the film justice. Blown highlights and dark shadows
 
dave lackey said:
Lovely blues!!!

Thank you for those images, John, there is a lot to learn from those. I am happy to see the sky color and overall well-balanced colors without over-saturation. :)

My last roll of Velvia turned out pretty nice but even with a bit of work in OS and LR, I think the results from the new E100 would have been preferable, and I say that even though I use high saturation a lot of the time, depending of course on the subject.
Click to expand...

These I just used my scanner software like I do with C-41. I didn't do any saturation controls or color correction; pretty much straight out of the scanner. I did lighten some of them but very little.
 
dave lackey said:
Lovely blues!!!

Thank you for those images, John, there is a lot to learn from those. I am happy to see the sky color and overall well-balanced colors without over-saturation. :)

My last roll of Velvia turned out pretty nice but even with a bit of work in OS and LR, I think the results from the new E100 would have been preferable, and I say that even though I use high saturation a lot of the time, depending of course on the subject.
Click to expand...

GarageBoy said:
I shoot slides just to view with a loupe - I've accepted it

That dark forest pic does not do the film justice. Blown highlights and dark shadows
Click to expand...

Haha!!! Lol, another Slide/Loupe addict like me! One day I will do an awesome drum scan from Velvia, Provia and E100 to compare them to loupe viewing!

Love the loupe!!!:):):)
 
Another light box/loupe viewer of slides here.

I project them occasionally and I would still like to get a 6x6 projector for my MF slides.

- Murray
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom