Kodak Ektar is a strange film

Vicky, and everyone, I'm curious. I've used the Color Synch tool Apple puts on iMacs. That seems to have done a reasonably good job, at least per some tests I've found on the web. (Don't know how reliable those are, though. And, you're just eyeballing things with the Apple software.)

But, since I don't make prints, at least not yet, I wonder if the increased precision a commercial calibrator would offer is worth it. We lack control of the monitors other people use to look at our online images. And, does an image processed on one calibrated monitor appear the same on any other calibrated monitor? I'd think not.
 
But, since I don't make prints, at least not yet, I wonder if the increased precision a commercial calibrator would offer is worth it. We lack control of the monitors other people use to look at our online images. And, does an image processed on one calibrated monitor appear the same on any other calibrated monitor? I'd think not.

It is worth it if you want to get accurate prints. I don't have an inkjet at home but the labs I use offer colour profiles for their printers. So the process is:

- Calibrate your screen using the device, could be a Huey, Spyder, or screen with built in calibration (expensive Eizos or NECs)

This should give your screen a colour accurate display, although you will want consistent ambient lighting or adjust the calibration if the ambient lighting in the room changes, most devices can compensate for this by checking the ambient room lighting every minute or user specified interval.

So, in fact two calibrated screens should show the same colours I believe, there may be differences between CRT, TN 6bit LCD and IPS 8bit LCD admittedly.

- The real benefit comes from printing though. Having got my image how I want it to look on screen, I can then take it into Photoshop and convert the colour profile of the image to the colour profile of my lab's printer in the CMYK colour space, this may make some subtle changes as CMYK has a smaller colour gamut to RGB colour space) - meaning I can send them an image with their printer's colour profile assigned to it and tell them not to automatically tweak it, meaning I should get the result I see on screen, on the print virtually identically as the screen was calibrated to show colour at the right temperature, intensity etc.

My tests so far have shown this to be the case.

There are some good articles here: http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/colour_management/prints_too_dark.html

Vicky
 
I've shot a few rolls recently and like the results, here are a few:

scan100820-02.jpg




scan100820-03.jpg




scan100820-04.jpg
 
after reading this thread I went to a roll of ektar :p

here you are some samples, MP+summicron 35, developed in tetenal colortec

I already love it :D

ektar1.jpg


ektar2.jpg


ektar3.jpg
 
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.

The following are all sunny 16, adjusted to my preferences, I just love this film

4424389024_4679359ff7.jpg


4424389022_62c30ed19f.jpg


4424378258_73de3c2fb1_z.jpg


4423598757_936336bcd7_z.jpg


Ive even used it in very low light:
4343205176_b52d14436c.jpg


All pics except the last one were taken with a Zeiss Ikon Contaflex I , Tessar 45mm f/2.8. The last was with one of my Canon SLRs + 50mm f/1.8 wide open
 
Last edited:
I'll throw a few more in the mix.. I have to say when I was a bit casual with metering on the M6 I wasn't so sure about the results, but with a proper lightmeter and medium format it looked a lot better, more natural. Still, I thought I'd post some 35mm shots:







 
Hasselblad 500C/M, 60mm Distagon, Ektar 100
1/125th, F/11 -ish

45738_1415174936273_1139559599_30994951_6302865_n.jpg


Same cam,
1/15th, F/4

45738_1415174856271_1139559599_30994949_6312035_n.jpg

Wurzberg, Germany, last Saturday. Developed in Neofin Blau, Stopped with Tetenal 60% Acetic Acid stop-bath, fixed and washed. Scanned with Canoscan 8800F @ 6400dpi, some lint removed in Photoshop.
 
Back
Top Bottom