Ektar 100 - interesting quote on Kodak website

StorminMatt · Mar 31, 2009

I have tried Velvia 50, Velvia 100F, Provia 100F, Provia 400X, and Astia 100F. And I just don't care for the colors with any of these films, Astia included. It just seems like Fuji is trying to 'wow' people by making all of their E6 films unnaturally colorful. And this is not my thing. Especially that nasty blue cast that no Fuji E6 film seems to be immune from.

2F/2F · Mar 31, 2009

StorminMatt said:
I have tried Velvia 50, Velvia 100F, Provia 100F, Provia 400X, and Astia 100F. And I just don't care for the colors with any of these films, Astia included. It just seems like Fuji is trying to 'wow' people by making all of their E6 films unnaturally colorful. And this is not my thing. Especially that nasty blue cast that no Fuji E6 film seems to be immune from.

You don't care for red, green, and blue? Because, just like Kodak films, those are what "the colors" are.

It is hogwash that all Fuji films are "unnaturally colorful" and have a "nasty blue cast". ALL transparency films pick up a cast in anything but the light for which they were balanced (so do negative films AND black and white for that matter, but you can't really tell by looking at them like with a transparency). Assuming it is not crummy processing, it is possible that you exposed them all in a color of light that made them look that way (such as shade), without using proper filtration to neutralize the color balance. Both Fuji and Kodak films offer a wide range of choice via film selection. All are good, and all are quite different. Each company's goal is to provide a line that gives you a choice, and that is what they do (though significantly *less* choice now, after the mass discontinuations).

Mark Antony · Mar 31, 2009

Matt
I owned a Lab for years, we used Fuji-Hunt chemicals and Fuji lab check. I can say without doubt there is no nasty blue cast on Fujicolor films.
Here is a colour patch on Astia:

If you take the image into an image editor you can see the colours with correct sRGB profile, or if you are lucky enough to have a colour aware browser it should look OK.
I think if you are getting 'wow' colours on Astia and blue casts you need to change Lab.
Normally if you have cyan/blue Fuji colour slide it is a problem with contamination- normally of the first developer.
The biggest problem with E-6 is normally magenta highlights (Fuji) and blue shadows (Kodak) caused by oxidization of colour dev making the p.h drop.
If Fuji isn't your thing fine but making blanket statements like all Fuji E-6 is blue, is not only untrue it also undermines your opinion.
Mark

keithwms · Mar 31, 2009

Agreed. Matt, when I read your post, that was literally the first time I'd heard/seen anybody refer to astia as 'unnaturally colourful.' You'd be in the severe minority with such an opinion. Would you care to share an 'unnaturally colourful' astia photo with us? A straight scan with rebate will do. Do be sure that your scanner and screen are calibrated so that we are comparing apples to apples.

My own experience with astia is that it has excellent colours when rated at box speed, and can be rated a little bit high or low per preference with no issues. Likewise 400x.

Anyway, I simply see no logic in this blanket insinuation that when you shoot colour, it has to be muted colour; but when you do b&w it's acceptable and 'artistic' to do lith and cyano and toning and IR and all manner of extreme tone manipulation.... :rolleyes: My blog "What's So Special About Black and White?" is roughly on this subject. Frankly, people who won't grant us (colour users) the same artistic latitude with tone manipulation that b&w photographers have had for 100+ years can just go right ahead and kiss my colourful...

And I still don't see why I should care what some Kodak clerk has to say about the future of E6.

Photo Engineer · Mar 31, 2009

Mark, All;

I have found an article which might interest you all.

Back in 1989, the range of Fuji films was plagued with a blue-magenta cast requiring heavy filters. It appeared in the Fujichrome 50RFP. This was reported by George Post in an article in the January 1990 issue of Darkroom Photography. It caused the recall or "disuse" of Fuji films for some time until they could correct the problem with their new emulsion(s).

I mention this because a similar complaint arose about 2 years ago with Fuji films having a distinct color cast when run with Kodak films in the E6 process.

It may be that we are still in and out of this type of problem.

IDK. Just FYI.

PE

Mark Antony · Mar 31, 2009

PE
The problem is caused by the colour developer p.h as I remember. We were advised by Fuji to run both Kodak and Fuji process control the films behave differently in the same process. The problem with RFP was that neutral grads caused a magenta blue tinge in the sky, but by 1989 (we were already testing early versions of Velvia on 4x5 sheet as beta testers) the decision to replace RFP with the then new Velvia had already been taken.
Fuji control strips were less sensitive to global chemical changes as far as I remember, Ektachrome became blue in step 5 long before Fuji started turning magenta.
I thought of my Kodak strips as an early warning, as most of my sheet film users used Fuji quickloads I use Hunt chems and Fujitech process monitoring.
Fuji doesn't have a global problem with blue casts, I've processed at least 50k sheets I'd notice.
Mark

Tom Kershaw · Mar 31, 2009

Mark,

Did you process much Kodak E6 sheet film? I ask as Kodak E6 sheet film doesn't seem to be marketed to the extent of the Fuji products in the UK circa 2009.

Tom.

Mark Antony · Mar 31, 2009

A little, I seem to remember having some Kodak 'quickloads' (sorry can't remember Kodak trade name) used by a local commercial photographer. Most of the guys here in East Anglia used RDP or RVP, possibly because we were a Fuji lab and displayed Fujitech plots in our reception we attracted more Fuji users.
Wedding guys seemed to like Portra although our biggest customer used Fuji and Agfa. We printed on Agfa machines and paper.
At one stage I processed quite a bit of Kodak 8x10 film for a group of customers, don't want to name drop.
In the 18 years I was working/and partner in the lab we used all 3 main suppliers-but only Fuji CR56/E-6.
Did you visit our Lab in Mountergate?

Tom Kershaw · Mar 31, 2009

Did you visit our Lab in Mountergate?

I used your competition, 'Reflections' for my limited colour film usage until they moved out of Norwich. I now do my own colour processing in a Jobo.

Tom.

Mark Antony · Mar 31, 2009

Ah yes! I know Richard pretty well, remember when he started in Hi-tec house in the mid 1980's.
Shame he has moved out of the city, with Reflections gone I think the last E-6 lab in the city has closed-sign of the times I'm afraid.
I often think if I had the time I'd start up a handline offering high quality processing for E-6/C41 and then I remember I have 3 kids and the reasons I'm not so active in the business ;-)

Tom Kershaw · Mar 31, 2009

Mark Antony said:
Ah yes! I know Richard pretty well, remember when he started in Hi-tec house in the mid 1980's.
Shame he has moved out of the city, with Reflections gone I think the last E-6 lab in the city has closed-sign of the times I'm afraid.
I often think if I had the time I'd start up a handline offering high quality processing for E-6/C41 and then I remember I have 3 kids and the reasons I'm not so active in the business ;-)

I presume many people use now use mail order processing or process themselves. Are you still active in photography on a commercial basis? Hopefully Reflections can continue to operate at their present location.

The automatic Jobo is very consistent but it still takes a certain amount of time to process film.

Tom.

Pupfish · Mar 31, 2009

I do both E6 and C41 in my darkroom. Love the look of E6/Astia/Velvia transparencies in 35mm, 120 and 4x5. But C41 film processing uses just 3 steps and takes less than half the time of E6. Once there's no longer much or any better resolution advantage to E6 in MF, it's going to be hard to justify going to all that trouble.

Compared to reversal papers like Ilfochrome, color negative materials are just so much easier and less frustrating to pull a nice analog wet print from once you're dialed in. RA4 is very speedy and the materials relatively cheap, or at least they were last I bought boxes of paper. Less time under the enlarger (no reciprocity failure in masked 16x20's), great dynamic range including both highlight and shadow detail, punchy color.

Ektar 100 coming soon in 120 is exciting for the prospect of again making fine art color wet prints, this time from my 645. Should easily trounce digital not only for higher resolution but in the per-print cost.

Photo Engineer · Mar 31, 2009

Mark;

From what I observed, Kodak E6 films are less sensitive to change as the control charts reported in the article and reported by others have said that the Kodak products were in control but the Fuji products were out of control. It was about this same time that Fuji changed their recommendation for their films, requiring a longer first development than Kodak films.

The most recent problem was similar in its manifestation and yielded magenta Fujichrome while the Kodak products such as EPP and the "G" series were totally in control.

IDK for sure, as I didn't run any tests. I have just read the article, seen the results of others and read the recent posts.

PE

Mark Antony · Mar 31, 2009

Photo Engineer said:
Mark;

From what I observed, Kodak E6 films are less sensitive to change as the control charts reported in the article and reported by others have said that the Kodak products were in control but the Fuji products were out of control.

No according to the Process control manual (Fuji) Kodak are very much more sensitive, they had many different curves for different conditions ie 10% contamination of FD with fix-all showing Fuji move less.
Pretty much that is my experience, Fuji is far more tolerant to chemical change.
I'll post later if I can find the manual.
Mark

Photo Engineer · Mar 31, 2009

Mark;

That is interesting in view of the fact that the Kodak film remained in control while the Fuji film went out of control in the article I cited and also in the recent (2 years ago) complaints. The article showed Kodak and Fuji control strips and photographs with severe crossover in the Fuji and none in the Kodak.

It is also interesting that at the time of the article, the balance was 80% Kodak and 20% Fuji in most labs but now it is the reverse, but the same problem seems to be happening on and off.

IDK personally, but the statements I've seen seem to support the reverse of what you say. I look forward to more information.

PE

Mark Antony · Mar 31, 2009

Possibly using Fuji hunt vs Kodak chemicals makes a difference? Here is the over/under replenished spread for D-max

Here is a link to the online Fuji E-6 Manual as a PDF for any interested party.
http://www.fujihunt.com/fuji/fhvip.nsf/files/Manuals/$file/E6manual.pdf

Just take a look at those RGB spreads Fuji vs 'competing brand' In my experience the Kodak test strips were much more sensitive to change (in fujihunt chems) than CR56 or AP44 process control (we ran them all)
Mark

Photo Engineer · Mar 31, 2009

Mark;

The article pretty much showed the opposite but using Kodak chemistry. How interesting.

It is also interesting that they show the data as E6 in the link when they have a competing name for their own proprietary process.

PE

StorminMatt · Mar 31, 2009

keithwms said:
Agreed. Matt, when I read your post, that was literally the first time I'd heard/seen anybody refer to astia as 'unnaturally colourful.' You'd be in the severe minority with such an opinion. Would you care to share an 'unnaturally colourful' astia photo with us? A straight scan with rebate will do. Do be sure that your scanner and screen are calibrated so that we are comparing apples to apples.

My own experience with astia is that it has excellent colours when rated at box speed, and can be rated a little bit high or low per preference with no issues. Likewise 400x.

Anyway, I simply see no logic in this blanket insinuation that when you shoot colour, it has to be muted colour; but when you do b&w it's acceptable and 'artistic' to do lith and cyano and toning and IR and all manner of extreme tone manipulation.... :rolleyes: My blog "What's So Special About Black and White?" is roughly on this subject. Frankly, people who won't grant us (colour users) the same artistic latitude with tone manipulation that b&w photographers have had for 100+ years can just go right ahead and kiss my colourful...

And I still don't see why I should care what some Kodak clerk has to say about the future of E6.

Bottom line: I tried shooting Fuji films. And I don't like them, PERIOD! Perhaps it's not really about how strongly they render colors. But they all have that certain unnatural 'Fuji look' that I just don't like. In any case, if you like Fuji, then by all means shoot it. I'm not going to stop you. But Kodak films just suit my tastes MUCH better. And that's it.

2F/2F said:
Assuming it is not crummy processing, it is possible that you exposed them all in a color of light that made them look that way (such as shade), without using proper filtration to neutralize the color balance.

This is probably what I am running up against. But the bottom line is the same: If Kodak works better for me under the conditions that I tend to shoot, why even bother with Fuji?

Q.G. · Mar 31, 2009

There definitely is something in it.
Some (not all) Fuji films' colours are indeed rather garish. It's not just wrong processing, or anything like that.

I sure hope that the Ektar's colours aren't that over the top too.

But to everyone their own.

Henning Serger · Apr 2, 2009

alanrockwood said:
From a Q&A at the Kodak website:

It sounds like EKTAR 100 Film might be an alternative to high color reversal films?
Exactly. And that’s important as E-6 processing becomes less readily available.

Source: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/prof...ar/qAndA.jhtml?pq-path=13319/1230/13328/13344

Do you thinkg this hint that E-6 will eventually be phased out?

Hello Alan,

I am currently involved in a very detailed scientific film test project. We have tested all slide and color negative films on the market. We run our test with a Zeiss ZF 2/50 Makro-Planar, and a rather low object contrast of about four stops (1:16). That is an object contrast which you have in almost all scenes.

Kodaks statement, that the Ektar 100 is the color negative film with the finest grain, is right.

But Ektar 100 is not the sharpest CN Film, and not the CN film with the highest resolution (we achieved 105 Lp/mm). Fuji Superia Reala and PRO 160C are a bit sharper, and have a bit higher resolution (110-115 Lp/mm). And a bit coarser grain. The differences between all these films are there, but they are not so big.
The films with the highest sharpness and best resulution are the new Fuji Superias without the "4th layer" (about 120 lp/mm). But these films have significantly coarser grain than Ektar 100.

With slide films, you can achieve a bit finer grain than with Ektar 100 (especially with Fujis slide films), much higher resolution and much better sharpness.
With Kodak E100G, Fuji Provia 100F, Sensia 100, Astia 100F we achieved 130 Lp/mm. With Velvia 100F 140 Lp/mm. All with excellent sharpness and extremely fine grain, better than all CN films of the market.

With Provia 400X we got 110 Lp/mm.

So, if you consider the parameters fineness of grain, resolution and sharpness, Kodak Ektar 100 can not replace slide film.

And of course slide projection is unique concerning color brillance and resolution.
We have tested different projection lenses, and with a Leica Super-Colorplan P2 and a Kindermann 2,4/90 MC-B (made by Docter Optics Wetzlar) we successfully transferred the 140 Lp/mm resolution onto the screen.

There is no digital beamer on the market which can nearly match that. The technology is not existent. Period. Even 100.000€ 4k beamers can't achieve these resolution values.
For really big pictures with unmatched color brillance and resolution slide projection with a good projector and projection lens ist still state of the art. And will be for a long time, because the gap between slide projection and beamers is very huge.

Best regards,
Henning

Henning Serger · Apr 2, 2009

Q.G. said:
All technical data sheets? Perhaps.

Zeiss once measured the resolving power of various films (Camera Lens News 19, 2003).
Ektar 25 managed to resolve 200 lp/mm. Velvia did 160 lp/mm. Portra 160VC 150 lp/mm. Portra 160NC 140 lp/mm. Ektachrome 100 VS recorded 130 lp/mm.
Not much in it.

....

I've talked with the Zeiss people about their tests. They did it with a test chart that had an object contrast of 1:100.
In cases with lower object contrast, slide film has a much better performance relative to CN film. As reported (please see my posting above), we run our tests with an object contrast of about 1:16. This object contrast is more relevant to daily photography. And then slide film outperforms CN film concerning resolution.

And, very important: Kodak Ektar 100 is a completely different film compared to the former Ektar 25! Different technology, different results.
Ektar 100 has similar fine grain, more latitude, better colors (yes, it is a matter of taste ), but Ektar 100 has much lower resolution and sharpness than Ektar 25.

Best regards,
Henning

keithwms · Apr 2, 2009

Thanks for the data and the sensible summary, Henning.

Ron, Mark, the only Fuji slide film with which I have seen any important colour casts are the old velvia 50 and provia 100f. I use neither, and there are plenty of other options in the current Fuji lineup.

I still await Matt's scanned example of an Astia 100f slide with unacceptable colour rendition. Something tells me that I am going to have to wait a long time. Anyway one is certainly entitled to one's own opinion; I only challenged this particular opinion because it was part of a blanket anti-Fuji statement that I consider obviously untrue. I could make a similarly unjustified statements about Kodak films as well.

BobNewYork · Apr 2, 2009

I don't shoot a vast amount of colour - and when I do I tend to shoot mainly negatives. I think I am safe in saying that in light of the posts by Henning Serger - Case Closed!!

Bob H

StorminMatt · Apr 2, 2009

keithwms said:
I still await Matt's scanned example of an Astia 100f slide with unacceptable colour rendition. Something tells me that I am going to have to wait a long time.

You are going to have to wait a long time - I don't have a scanner. At least not a good one - not one that can even half way show what the slides REALLY look like. Just a cheapo, POS flatbed. One more thing. You sound like a Fuji person. So I am guessing that you would not see a problem with my Fuji slides, and find ALOT not to like about my Kodak slides. You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. But so am I.

Ektar 100 - interesting quote on Kodak website

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency