High quality Slow c 41 film recommendation needed

[gzhuang]

Are the terms high quality and desaturation oxymorons?

 

[mnemosyne]

Are the terms high quality and desaturation oxymorons?

that would depend on the criteria that you use to judge "quality"

 

[gzhuang]

I certainly think it depends on manufacturer's propaganda as well.

that would depend on the criteria that you use to judge "quality"

 

[polyglot]

I really like Reala and Pro160S/NS. It's kind of coarse (about the same graininess as Portra 400) but the colours seem really accurate to me. It prints and scans extremely easily - more easily than Portra IMHO. It may or may not be still available in whatever format you need.

For example.

 

[RattyMouse]

I really like Reala and Pro160S/NS. It's kind of coarse (about the same graininess as Portra 400) but the colours seem really accurate to me. It prints and scans extremely easily - more easily than Portra IMHO. It may or may not be still available in whatever format you need.

For example.

I adore Reala film. I had no idea it was going to die so suddenly. Reala was freely available and very cheap in 120 size when I got back into film. I shot it with reckless abandon for about 6 months. Then I took a pause from film, and returned 3 or so months lather to find it GONE! Some stock would dribble in on occasion and it's still available even today, but at $12 or more per roll. I used to pay $4.

 

[Les Sarile]

Try expired Ektar 25. Here's a 25 year old sample shot this year.

I still have a quite few left of Kodak Ektar 125 which expired 4/1992 that I am shooting at ISO64. Works quite well . . .

 

[sagai]

Vvow!

 

[mnemosyne]

I still have a quite few left of Kodak Ektar 125 which expired 4/1992 that I am shooting at ISO64. Works quite well . . .

The whites/highlights in this picture show a very distinct pink/magenta cast. not sure if it is an issue with the outdated film or rather the scan or the lighting of the scenery (green canopy?) that somehow botched up the color correction in post. Correctd for neutral whites it looks like this:

 

[Les Sarile]

The whites/highlights in this picture show a very distinct pink/magenta cast. not sure if it is an issue with the outdated film or rather the scan or the lighting of the scenery (green canopy?) that somehow botched up the color correction in post. Correctd for neutral whites it looks like this

I don't feel I made any mistakes in my capture of the scene or subsequent workflow that requires your correction but I understand that you may have an opinion on how you might prefer the results.

 

[Photo Engineer]

I have to agree with Les. In the "corrected" version there is an overall greenish cast to everything but the waterfall.

However, the original Ektar was known for bad keeping, in which grain went up with age if the film was refrigerated or frozen. There was no overall keeping problem wrt speed or curve shape.

PE

 

[RattyMouse]

I still have a quite few left of Kodak Ektar 125 which expired 4/1992 that I am shooting at ISO64. Works quite well . . .

works well if you like pink water.

 

[polyglot]

Sure, the corrected version is too green. But Les' original Ektar 25 waterfall post above has severe green/magenta crossover unless someone just dumped a 44 gallon drum of red dye in the river. Can't tell if it was the film or the scanning, but I suspect over-exposure and/or scan technique.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Or it might be direct sunlight at sunset/rise affecting highlights.

PE