Balto
Established
It handles skin tones oddly sometimes, really depends on the light. Everything else about it though is wonderful. Push it to 400 sometime, you get some awesome results.
Kenj8246
Well-known
Mr Flibble, I'd be curious to know what the foot on that jackhammer is used to accomplish.
Kenny
Kenny
charjohncarter
Veteran
I agree, it is wonderful, except I've never pushed it. This is from the Kodak website:
What about portraiture? Professional photographers will more likely prefer KODAK PROFESSIONAL PORTRA Films for their consistently natural reproduction of the full range of skin tones.
I like skin better in the shade with Ektar 100, but here is one I did in the sun with a Kodak DuoFlex (plus a portrait attachment):
bobby_novatron
Photon Collector
Love Ektar as well. One of my favourite films, although I like Portra 400 better for natural skin tones.
Hot off the press (scanner?), here's a shot I took just a couple of days ago.
Contax G2, 45mm F2 Planar, Kodak Ektar 100.
Hot off the press (scanner?), here's a shot I took just a couple of days ago.
Contax G2, 45mm F2 Planar, Kodak Ektar 100.
Gregoyle
Well-known
I'm not an expert, but that looks like a smaller version of a tamper that we used to pack the ground before pouring concrete. In a military setting, I could see something like that being useful to prep the ground for mortars or artillery.
BTW, I love the way Ektar renders WWII re-enactors, the colors still have that cast that makes the photos look like they might just be something you pulled up from your grandfather's basement.
-Greg
Sunti
Established
Ektar = colors of the slides, latitude of the negatives, a bit of both in characteristics IMHO.
The Ektar is one of my favorite film, and from my experience, it's more suitable for landscape, etc. rather than for portraiture. In certain light, it can throw the skin color into a weird reddish-brown tone that isn't easy to simply desat and set right in post. I prefer Portra for portraits.
The Ektar is one of my favorite film, and from my experience, it's more suitable for landscape, etc. rather than for portraiture. In certain light, it can throw the skin color into a weird reddish-brown tone that isn't easy to simply desat and set right in post. I prefer Portra for portraits.
bobby_novatron
Photon Collector
Good point! I thought the exact same thing when I saw that photo -- looks almost like a color slide from the 1950's. Especially with the lower contrast of the Speed Graphic 'Ektar' lens ... really gives it that antiquated look.
I use Ektar in 35mm a lot, but rarely in 120. I have a 6x9 roll adapter for my Crown Graphic, I should load it with some Ektar 120 and try it out!
benlees
Well-known
The first time I tried the Ektar was when I ran out of Reala. Needless to say I didn't like it! Seemed a little dull, but I may try it again. Scanned beautifully, though.
Photo_Smith
Well-known
charjohncarter:
used it but not with skin, that is its short fall.
John I'm not finding Ektar that bad WRT skin tone, certainly when compared to other high saturation films of the past like Agfa Ultra or Fuji Velvia.
This taken on my old pre war Bessa I
This on my Rolleiflex afternoon sun:
It could be the British sun isn't as powerful as yours, but overall considering the red saturation this film exhibits skin tones are pretty good
used it but not with skin, that is its short fall.
John I'm not finding Ektar that bad WRT skin tone, certainly when compared to other high saturation films of the past like Agfa Ultra or Fuji Velvia.
This taken on my old pre war Bessa I
This on my Rolleiflex afternoon sun:
It could be the British sun isn't as powerful as yours, but overall considering the red saturation this film exhibits skin tones are pretty good
Mr_Flibble
In Tabulas Argenteas Refero
Greg's got it with his answer. It would be used for packing down the ground before any construction work the engineer battalions would have to do. From building emplacements to bridges or repairing road surfaces.
The tamper on this pneumatic hammer can be replaced with several different tool heads including a jack and shovel.
Normally I prefer to overexpose Ektar film about half a stop, to give it that extra bit of saturation.
Anniversary Speed Graphic with 127mm f/4.7 Ektar.
Kenj8246
Well-known
Yeah, the rolls I shot were shot from 64 to 80. Like I said, I like Ektar.
Kenny
Kenny
anjoca76
Well-known
I love Ektar, but I also find it can be hit or miss on skin tones, depending upon the light. It can be pinkish. But overall, it's a terrific film. This thread is reminding me to load some up this week!
sailor
Well-known
I love Ektar for landscape work. Both pictures Leica M5 with Zeiss 35mm f2.8 Biogon.
Winter Trees & Tinto Hill by Elmer Duck, on Flickr
Loch Cill Chriosd - Isle of Skye by Elmer Duck, on Flickr
Winter Trees & Tinto Hill by Elmer Duck, on Flickr
Loch Cill Chriosd - Isle of Skye by Elmer Duck, on Flickr
raid
Dad Photographer
I bought Ektar 100 in 120 format for the SWC for my Italy trip.
02Pilot
Malcontent
I'm thinking very seriously about committing to Ektar as my color film for my trip to Slovenia and Croatia this summer. Seems like it would be perfectly suited for the colors of the Adriatic coast.
raid
Dad Photographer
To be on the safe side, I also bought some Reala 100 in 120 format. Reala gives pastel like colors.
Bingley
Veteran
Bingley
Veteran
Single coated Tessar- type lenses have a way of taming Ektar that I find pleasing for landscape photography. This is another sample from 120 Ektar:
Russian Hill by bingley0522, on Flickr
Russian Hill by bingley0522, on Flickr
