Help me choose color negative film, please.

mikecnichols

Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Messages
345
Location
Marion, VA
Format
Multi Format
Mike,
that picture is very good. I really enjoyed looking at it.
I have a group on another website for Ektar portraits. Some are very good and interesting although not "traditional" but it is nice to have another medium to express oneself.

Thanks....the more muted colors really work on it I think...especially with the tree trunk, but that's where I wish the blacks were a little blacker. Detail is nice, but the grayish hue in the blacks taint it a bit. Oh well I guess. I've never gotten into portraits myself other than some random ones as they occur naturally, usually at area cultural festivals where people are doing things from the area's heritage like making Apple butter and molasses.
 
OP
OP

tkamiya

Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Messages
4,284
Location
Central Flor
Format
Multi Format
Thanks everybody. I picked up few rolls of Ektar to get started. I'll have to see how it will look.
 
OP
OP

tkamiya

Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Messages
4,284
Location
Central Flor
Format
Multi Format
Well.... I'm back.

Took 3 rolls of Ektar and shot mostly landscape/fall foliage type. Is it true that Ektar is sensitive to exposure variations, ie. less tolerant of exposure errors? It's rather hard to judge because I'm looking at scanned results but seems colors are extreme in some areas and washed out in others. Rendering of people's skin were very unusual. Not bad for first time trying a particular film I guess.... anyway, that was my result.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

kb3lms

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2006
Messages
1,004
Location
Reading, PA
Format
35mm
Yes, agreed. I do really like Ektar but it can be very touchy on skin tones and is less tolerant of exposure errors, at least that is my finding from some rolls this fall. If you do some of your own RA-4 printing, I got some very nice results with Ektar on Fuji CA Type C. In general, though, I would say it is not a film for people, it is a film for things. Kind of like Velvia.
 

jglass

Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2007
Messages
399
Location
Austin
Format
Multi Format
Here is a pretty careful examination of Ektar 100 by Roger Hicks, with specific notes on the effects of over- and under-exposure. Very useful if you're using that film
 
OP
OP

tkamiya

Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Messages
4,284
Location
Central Flor
Format
Multi Format
I think, many of mine were overexposed by at least 1 stop, perhaps more. They are well into "disaster" area here...
 

BetterSense

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2008
Messages
3,151
Location
North Caroli
Format
35mm
I shoot Ektar, exposed via guess method, in my Pen 1/2 frame camera. I err heavily toward overexposure like I do with any negative film. I haven't noticed that Ektar has less latitude than other color negative films, although if there were a small difference I wouldn't notice it .
 
OP
OP

tkamiya

Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Messages
4,284
Location
Central Flor
Format
Multi Format
My images look "OK" when viewed in 4x6 size equivalent, but the problems are obvious at 8x10. I must have grossly error-ed on my exposure - I see the purple tinge Roger Hicks talks about clearly and colors are really off. My mistake really was being so careless about exposure. I thought "the incredible exposure latitude" of C-41 color negative film also applies to Ektar. Which obviously, doesn't.
 

Tim Gray

Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2006
Messages
1,882
Location
OH
Format
35mm
I've shot Ektar up to 4 stops overexposed and didn't find what Roger Hicks did. I think it looks best by far properly exposed at box speed, though it looks good up to a stop overexposed. But I wouldn't cry if I happened to have shot two stops over.

If you are scanning, I personally think a LOT depends on your skill at scanning and adjusting afterwards to get nice color from it. It's very easy to bung it up and get crummy colors. I think that is where most people's complaints originate from. I don't know how it wet prints.

box speed
2 stops over (EI 25)
 

2F/2F

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
8,031
Location
Los Angeles,
Format
Multi Format

Tim Gray

Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2006
Messages
1,882
Location
OH
Format
35mm
Yup, incident meter. Those were scans, so this gets close to stuff we shouldn't talk about, but I think you could easily adjust either to get similar prints. There are also more in that series if you click through to the set. I think I went from -2 to +4.

The point still stands though that I just haven't experienced that Ektar suddenly falls apart with a stop or two of over exposure. I've found it seems to perform pretty much according to Kodak's recommendations, which I believe is an exposure latitude of -1/+2.
 

benjiboy

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
11,972
Location
U.K.
Format
35mm
I've tried Ektar in both 135 and 120 but I'm going back to my first love, Fuji Reala which for my money is the best general purpose I.S.O 100 film I've ever used.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Q.G.

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
5,535
Location
Netherlands
Format
Medium Format
I've tried Ektar too, and though it can be very good, it is quite 'temperamental'. (And it's not the scanning thing mentioned - it's the film itself.)
So i won't use it anymore, and stick with Portra 160 NC. What's not to like about that film?
 

2F/2F

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
8,031
Location
Los Angeles,
Format
Multi Format

In order to make the test give us the info that would help us understand how to approach this film, we'd have to make each print so that the midtones matched. That is the thing that will show a practical analysis of the film's latitude and how its characteristics change when making a real-world use of that latitude.

We know that overexposure of a neg will brighten a normal print, and that underexposure of a neg will darken a normal print. We need to know what happens to a print from an under or over exposed neg when the prints are manipulated to look as normal as possible, despite the abnormal exposure of the neg. That is what we do when printing from real-world negs. We don't just accept the fact that overexposure will make a bright print and underexposure will make a dark print. We manipulate prints away from the norm to adjust for less-than-perfect negative exposure. That is the practical use of latitude, so that is what we need to look at. You match the midtones to the normal print from the normal negative, and it lets us see what happens to the low and high tones.

We'd also have to first neutralize the color balance of the print from the normally exposed neg, and use the same filter pack (though, as was mentioned, not the same print exposure) for all the under and over pix. Then we could see how under and overexposure affect both contrast and color balance. But, most importantly, the midtones must match in density. A computer is probably not the best tool to analyze the results, but it can show us something useful if that is all you have. I think you have the shoot covered, and you can get a good analysis with the film you already have.

Ironically enough, minilab 4x6's are actually a halfway decent way to do this test, especially if the machine makes optical prints directly from the negatives. (Blue Moon is one lab that does this.) The auto exposure of the machine tries to get what its programming says is an ideal print, so a bracketed sequence printed in this fashion can tell you a lot. The auto color balance on the machines does the same. It will not tell you exactly how color balance is affected by exposure changes, but it will tell you to what extent a neg can be improperly exposed and still be color correctable.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…