No Clos Radio by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
No Clos Radio by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
Bud Break by Jim Fischer, on FlickrI completely agree with you about E100's idiosyncrasies. I switched to E100 from Fuji's offerings when they became essentially unavailable, and I'm still learning how to beat it into submission. Most of my shooting is in the Southwest, at or above 7,000 feet, so the blue cast is a real problem. Much of the time, I shoot with an 81B filter, something I only rarely did with Fuji films, and only in the evening. Also, I recently read that cr-56 chemistry, if used to process Fuji films at the same time as E100, can lead to color shifts due to processing residues from the Fuji films. I don't know how true this might be, but I want to do further research.One of these days I'll figure out how to make Ektachrome E100 look ok (the pronounced color cast of the film is...unusual).
No Clos Radio by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
Nikon F6, Nikkor 80-200 f/4 ai-s, Kodak Ektachrome E100.
No Clos Radio by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
Nikon F6, Nikkor 80-200 f/4 ai-s, Kodak Ektachrome E100.
Bud Break by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
Nikon F6, Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/3.5, Kodak Ektachrome E100.
CR-56 is just Fuji’s name for a process identical to E-6. Kodak owns (owned?) the E-6 name. Mixing Kodak and Fuji E-6 films does (did?) not cause colour shifts. Some films did cause the chemistry to exhaust more quickly, and labs that worked assuming that X litres of chemistry will develop Y rolls of film rather than measuring colour shifts and development activity could run into trouble with colour accuracy and slide permanence if a run was heavily biased to a film type that used more chemistry.Also, I recently read that cr-56 chemistry, if used to process Fuji films at the same time as E100, can lead to color shifts due to processing residues from the Fuji films. I don't know how true this might be, but I want to do further research.
That sounds logical. Could it be that labs had standardized on the exhaustion rates for Fuji films, since they had become the de facto industry standard for color transparency work?CR-56 is just Fuji’s name for a process identical to E-6. Kodak owns (owned?) the E-6 name. Mixing Kodak and Fuji E-6 films does (did?) not cause colour shifts. Some films did cause the chemistry to exhaust more quickly, and labs that worked assuming that X litres of chemistry will develop Y rolls of film rather than measuring colour shifts and development activity could run into trouble with colour accuracy and slide permanence if a run was heavily biased to a film type that used more chemistry.
Marty
That sounds logical. Could it be that labs had standardized on the exhaustion rates for Fuji films, since they had become the de facto industry standard for color transparency work?
All in all, I think that what slumgullion and I are both noting is a very different response to certain light conditions, compared to Fuji's offerings. Light that would give me magical results with Velvia gives me awful results with E100 (particularly evening light or heavy overcast). Flesh tones in sunlight, on the other hand, blow Velvia out of the water. E100 is a different tool, and one that I'm still learning to use, but it's also showing me how easy it is to get locked into a predictable pattern of responses to the visual world. As film photography's options have become more constricted, we film photographers (particularly transparency shooters) have had to adapt to the new realities and become more flexible. Kodachrome went away; Velvia 100 went away (and probably all Fuji slide films; no one seems sure), and now E100 is of necessity the film of choice. There's nothing to do but go with the flow!