Kodak film with Vision 3 tech?

[snaggs]

I've just bought a Coolscan 5000 and are getting silverfast which comes with a transparency for Kodak (its $100 more for a Fuji one).

So I was thinking I might start shooting more Kodak neg and E6.

Whats the best for ISO100 conditions? How does it compare to Sensia?

Daniel.

 

[E76]

I'm not exactly sure what you're asking in this thread, but the only color film designed for stills making use of the Vision 3 technology is Ektar 100, which by all accounts is an excellent, super fine grained color negative film.

As for the "best" ISO 100 Kodak slide film, that really all depends. All of them (E100G, E100GX, E100VS, and EPP) are good films, and the best way to determine which will be best for your needs is to try them! E100GX is a warm version of E100G, and E100VS is probably most similar to Velvia. EPP also has extra saturation, but if I recall correctly the grain of E100VS is finer. More information can be found on Kodak's website.

 

[StorminMatt]

As for the "best" ISO 100 Kodak slide film, that really all depends. All of them (E100G, E100GX, E100VS, and EPP) are good films, and the best way to determine which will be best for your needs is to try them! E100GX is a warm version of E100G, and E100VS is probably most similar to Velvia. EPP also has extra saturation, but if I recall correctly the grain of E100VS is finer.

I would not say that E100VS is similar to Velvia. Although they are both considered 'high saturation' films, the look of E100VS is quite different from Velvia. In particular, E100VS tends to be a MUCH warmer film than Velvia (which is typically the case for Kodak vs Fuji). EPP is actually an older emulsion from the 1980s. Unlike the newer Ektachromes, it is a traditional emusion (non T-grain). So it tends to be on the grainier side than, say, E100VS. Saturation is higher with EPP than E100G, E100GX, or EPN. But it is certainly not as 'over the top' as Velvia or E100VS. This kind of puts it in a rather unique position, as there are really no films out there today that feature moderate levels of saturation (except maybe Kodachrome 25, but that has long been discontinued).

 

[snaggs]

Which is the newest Ektar 100? Surely, if it was released before Vision 3, its not going to have all the advancements?

Daniel.

 

[Alex Bishop-Thorpe]

Which Vision 3 technology benefits are you looking for? Ektar 100 is an entirely new product released quite recently, I only found it for sale locally (SA) last week, but it was available in the US some months ago. The Portra lines have been improved several times in recent years. Portra and Ektar are the most modern colour negative emulsions on the market.
As I understand it no new R&D is going into Colour Slide as far as Kodak is concerned, or at least none has for some time.

 

[Mark Antony]

I think the new Ektar 100 uses technology derived from Vision 2 series of films called two electron sensitization. I think vision 3 uses new dye technologies to give smoother colour but I can remember where i read this.
I think we will see quite a bit of Vision tech in future Kodak films and that is proof Kodak are investing in the future of film.

The current Ektar film is an advanced film with fine grain and good colour and latitude, sure its human nature to want more but I think you should try that film along with the excellent Portra range which has had constant tweeking by Kodak to make it a very good film.

 

[nworth]

The Kodak transparency you got with your scanner is a certified calibration tool. It is used to set up a profile for the scanner. The resulting profile works quite well for any color film - Kodak or Fuji, positive or negative. There may be some very minor advantages to using the Fuji calibration transparency for Fuji film (after all, Fuji and Kodak dyes are different), but for all practical purposes, the Kodak calibrator works fine. As for using Kodak films, give them a try. They are excellent. But people often develop a style for a certain brand of film, and a new brand may need some experience and adaptation.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Kodak has 2 new technologies that they described for Ektar and Portra films.

1. Vision 2 and Portra (to date) used 2 electron sensitization which gave about 1 stop more in speed for the same grain or better grain at the same speed as an older emulsion.

2. Vision 3 and Ektar as I understand the change is the use of T-Grain + cubic technology in a given layer to further improve speed and grain. See the Kodak announcements on this. They give a short descriptin of the blended grains. This will probably move into the Portra products soon.

3. New couplers which eliminate all need for formalin stabilization.

Some of this has migrated into the B&W products that were recently introduced.

None of the above, AFAIK, has been introduced into the E6 product line due to the very low sales. The improvements in negative products are all driven by the motion picture market.

In the early days, Kodak used to give away a calibration negative with every copy of their color dataguide book.

PE

 

[snaggs]

I just read this review;

http://www.boeringa.demon.nl/menu_technic_ektar100.htm

It seems that Ektar 100 is no finer in grain than Velvia 100?

Daniel.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Please note that in the review, the Fuji film is much lower in color contrast. This will bias all results in the direction of better grain for the Fuji film.

Also, statements in the review are a bit off showing a lack of understanding of color systems.

An example is the statement that the negative is limited to orange-red while the positive shows a full gamut of color. This is totally wrong! Another is the observation that the grain in the blue layer is higher than in the other layers. The blue, in normal design, is allowed to be higher in grain for technical reasons and due to the fact that human perception of yellow grain and sharpness is lower than any other color. So, the report is flawed but does show some very good data overall.

It has taken me some time to decide to make these comments which I read when the report was originally posted.

Film quality can only be compared when the following are equal: Speed, contrast and color saturation. Then, one may compare: sharpness, grain and resolution among others. If there is a mismatch, then one can mistake higher color saturation or contrast for improved sharpness or for worse grain.

PE

 

[Mark Antony]

I just read this review;

http://www.boeringa.demon.nl/menu_technic_ektar100.htm

It seems that Ektar 100 is no finer in grain than Velvia 100?

Daniel.

Read his footnote:
Now a scanner doesn't need to do a lot to faithfully reproduce a slide, besides capturing the pixels. However, with color negative film, the limited contrast range of the original negative needs to be expanded to a full contrast range from the deepest black to pure white. It is the equivalent of stretching an elastic band 10x. Now each tiny error in determining the exact value of the Red/Green/Blue (RGB) values of the pixels of a color negative gets expanded / exaggerated as well in the process. Hence, almost inevitably, a high resolution scan result of color negative will look a bit more "grainy" as well, as these pixel errors have been enhanced as well. I think this is the main reason why the Velvia 100 results looks more smooth, compared to Ektar 100.

 

[nworth]

The review told me a lot more about the problems of scanning than about the films, although some interesting information about the films was given. Since most of us scan film for printing, the insights were quite valuable. The remarks about the low contrast of color negatives making for more difficult scanning were interesting. They make some sense, and maybe the hybrid site should explore this issue more fully. My own experience has been that transparencies have been somewhat harder to scan than negatives. The review reveals what I have found to be a very common (increasingly common) misunderstanding about color negative films. People think the orange-brown color they see is a filter, where it is really part of a mask. The two are quite different.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Read his footnote:
Now a scanner doesn't need to do a lot to faithfully reproduce a slide, besides capturing the pixels. However, with color negative film, the limited contrast range of the original negative needs to be expanded to a full contrast range from the deepest black to pure white. It is the equivalent of stretching an elastic band 10x. Now each tiny error in determining the exact value of the Red/Green/Blue (RGB) values of the pixels of a color negative gets expanded / exaggerated as well in the process. Hence, almost inevitably, a high resolution scan result of color negative will look a bit more "grainy" as well, as these pixel errors have been enhanced as well. I think this is the main reason why the Velvia 100 results looks more smooth, compared to Ektar 100.

He has it backwards. First, the negative scale is being compressed in a linear fashion. Second, the Velvia is smooth due to the much lower contrast and the lossy nature of the toe and shoulder when reproduced pos-pos. The negative film is linear.

PE

 

[Bruce Watson]

Read his footnote:
Now a scanner doesn't need to do a lot to faithfully reproduce a slide, besides capturing the pixels. However, with color negative film, the limited contrast range of the original negative needs to be expanded to a full contrast range from the deepest black to pure white. It is the equivalent of stretching an elastic band 10x.

This is ridiculous. Full range color tranny film typically has a density range of around 3.0 - 3.4. It's hard to measure anything higher than 3.4 due to the lack of test targets above 3.4. But the lack of test targets tells you that there's not a lot of need.

A full range color negative film typically has a density range of around 2.5 to 3.0.

This is hardly a 10x difference. Makes me wonder what he's smokin'.

Now each tiny error in determining the exact value of the Red/Green/Blue (RGB) values of the pixels of a color negative gets expanded / exaggerated as well in the process.

This is just silly. I've seen several scans where you could measure hues in the shadows and highlights and see that the hues are stable as value and saturation change. No worse than darkroom paper, and arguably better.

If scanning negative film really didn't work, no one would be doing it.

Hence, almost inevitably, a high resolution scan result of color negative will look a bit more "grainy" as well, as these pixel errors have been enhanced as well. I think this is the main reason

why the Velvia 100 results looks more smooth, compared to Ektar 100.[/I]

Um, no. Color negative might look a bit more grainy then color tranny, but that's not why. The reason why is that graininess is directly related to density. And density in trannies is in the shadows where the resulting graininess in the print is hard to see. With negatives the density is in the highlights, and the resulting graininess in the print is therefore much easier to see. This is just simple physics.

Any tranny film will "look smoother" than a comparable negative film if the only thing different is that one's a tranny and the other is a negative. This is so obvious that mostly we don't even bother to comment on it.

 

[Photo Engineer]

I wish I could give the both of you a course in color system design (neg-pos and pos-pos). It would explain a lot to you that you are both missing along with the review, on color photo systems.

Just consider one major flaw in your overall thoughts. A color negative system is being COMPRESSED to yield a tonal range of from 0.1 to 3.0 in a final comparable positive image or as high as 4.0 in motion picture print films. Common densities can be read up to 6.0 and I have done it! A value of 4.0 is not uncommon in a neg-pos print.

All film systems have the highest grain in the region of viewed dmax of the final positive image. In pos-pos, the dmax is the fastest and coarsest grain. In neg-pos, dmin is fastest and coarsest which, when printed, becomes dmax.

PE

 

[Scott_Sheppard]

I wish I could give the both of you a course in color system design (neg-pos and pos-pos)

Hello Ron:

How about we do a radio program on this topic ?? You game ??

Thanks

Scott

PS: See you in Rochester NEXT WEEK.. I am REALLY looking forward to it !!

 

[Photo Engineer]

Scott;

Looking forward to it myself.

Give me a call beforehand, maybe Thursday or Friday this week?

As for the subject, I would be glad to do anything you wish.

Best wishes.

Ron