Kodak Ektalure?

[Matt5791]

Just bought a job lot of darkroom stuff, including loads of paper.

One item is an unopened pack of 50 Kodak Ektalure 11"X14" which has been kept in the freezer.

I'm told it is lovely for portraits.

Anyone else like / dislike this paper? any thoughts?

Thanks a lot

Matt

 

[Rlibersky]

What surface is it. The X surface is wonderful to look at, IMO. Are you thinking of getting rid of it?

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

It's great stuff. I think Les McLean has a stash. I have one of his prints on it. He might have some developer suggestions.

 

[Monophoto]

Ektalure was a very nice warm-tone paper. The X (rough) surface is rather legendary, and I was also fond of the G surface.

One characteristic - it does tend to be rather green, but that can be corrected by toning in seleniium.

 

[jim appleyard]

Yes, it *WAS* good stuff. However, like so many photo things these days, it has been discontinued. I only tried Ektalure once , but I was impressed with its warm tone, and its ability to give a good, solid black that could hold shadow detail at the same time; something you have to see to understand. Double weight was a plus as well.

I souped in Dektol, but I looked forward to trying this paper in other devs, especially warm-tone ones, but never got the chance.

I hope your paper is still good!

 

[jim appleyard]

I was just going to ask about a "G" surface, but Mr. Mono already answered. The G was a nice surface for portraits, I thought.

 

[Charles Webb]

Ektalure G & X in 16x20 was my favorite paper until it's demise. Some one mentioned a paper that is still made today that is very much like Ektalure, but I can't remember who posted the name or what post it weas in. I would sure like to try some of the new stuff! Ektalure could be developed in Dektol, Selectol, and Selectol Soft from Kodak, it's look seemed to be totally controlable by choice of developer and the dilution chosen to work with it. it was a wonderful paper!

Charlie...............................

 

[Les McLean]

Matt I have a dwindling stash of 20 x 16 G and love it. processing in Dektol may produce a greenish print colour but selenium or gold toning will remove it. I haven't yet tried it in the new Ilford Warmtone and Cooltone developers but intend to in the next couple of days so I'll post a comment in this thread to let you know my thoughts. One thing to warn you about Matt, it is very slow and needs a lot of exposure.

 

[pgomena]

It's also very slow to clear -- fix for a full 5 minutes, intermittent agitation. Lovely paper for portraits, can produce a deep, chocolate-brown black with warmtone developer and selenium toner. A pity it's gone.

Peter Gomena

 

[fparnold]

I printed some pictures on the G surface years ago, and liked the warm, but not brown tone, and the delightfully unobtrusive cream base. You had to compare it to something like Brovira for it to becomes obvious.

Enjoy the paper.

 

[cao]

Anyone else like / dislike this paper? any thoughts?

It's absolutely crummy stuff and in fact very dangerous to handle. You should send it to me for proper disposal. I'll also dispose of any Portriga #3 gloss as that too is a fairly miserable paper.

 

[df cardwell]

It came in F, G, K, R, X, Y.

Paul Strand's paper was Illustrator's Special: Ektalure emulsion on a pure white base,E surface. Eat your hearts out.

.

 

[smieglitz]

Ektalure G was my favorite paper of all time. I mourn.

When Kodak discontinued it, I discontinued Kodak.

Joe

 

[df cardwell]

Ektalure G was my favorite paper of all time. I mourn.

When Kodak discontinued it, I discontinued Kodak.

Joe

Joe, be fair. They couldn't GIVE it away at the end !

Amazing, isn't it ?

 

[Matt5791]

Thanks for the replies everyone. On examining the box it seems the surface is G. The pro photographer I bought it off was raving about it. I said to her "I suppose you are all digital now" and to my suprise she said no - just didn't have time or space for the darkroom any more and just used the pro labs.

I am really looking forward ot having a go with this. She also said that it had been popular for those 1930's Hollywood portraits?

Les - thanks for the advice on how slow it is, so I'll look out for this.

Thanks,
Matt

 

[smieglitz]

Joe, be fair. They couldn't GIVE it away at the end !

Amazing, isn't it ?

Kodak could've marketed it much better.

Instead, photographers were fed RC crap. Yes, Amazing...

Joe