Clyde Butcher's comments were that Ektar is very forgiving relative to slide film. Many folks find Portra colors washed out, and Ektar's more vivid. I don't. I think you pick Potra for people shots, and Ektar for landscape - if you can. But then I print digitally so adjust in post processing. Now using LF, I've boxes of both and eager (like you) to see how they come out, but in the interim have been shooting mostly B&W. FWIW, I took 30 plus rolls of Portra 400 to France and was VERY happy with the results. Only miss is the dynamic range at dusk that digital could have addressed more easily with the WYSIWIG.
...I'm looking for a good lab to make 8x10 prints for me. Any suggestions as to some good labs I can try?
Thanks.
They'll both do fine at box speed, but I personally like exposing Portra 160 at 100 since the additional 2/3 stop doesn't hurt. It won't necessarily hurt with Ektar either (i.e. it would do OK at EI64), but as pointed out, Ektar is slightly more finicky in terms of getting your exposure right. Don't panic though; it's not nearly as 'bad' as some people say it is - i.e. it's not as finicky as slide film. It's just a little more finicky than e.g. Portra. One other reason why I prefer shooting Ektar at box speed is simply because it's already 'only' 100 and handheld life below ISO 100 tends to get a bit more tricky.Do these provide fairly decent results at box speed and is there any advantages to rating them lower than box speed?
BWhen I take Extar I keep in a cooler, a ice pack to keep it cool but not cold.
Professional color films are prone to color shifts, from the Kodak data sheet. When driving I set the my SUVs tem to around 75 degrees.
Arguably the same argument exists for keeping amateur and professional films cool - it ensures consistent colour response.I might be my lack of experience shooting film, but "color shifts" are one of those things that I view as psychological arguments. Color shifts would only be important to me if people came out looking like oompa loompas.
If you want consistent, repeatable, accurate colour, use professional films and keep them reasonably cool - at least be sure they don't get hot.
...Ektar isn't artificially warmed like Portra. And anyone who claims "I can correct anything in PS afterwards" doesn't know what they are talking about. Ektar is prone to cyan crossover into its blues, and once curves are crossed you've got a headache. It's a far easier problem to alleviate right at the time of the shot.
But I otherwise hate cyan contamination of blue shadows. It's a complex topic, but one potential silver bullet is a new coated Tiffen filter which has the effect of an 81B amber combined with a 2B skylight.
We’re about to embark on two or three weeks of vacation and while we’re staying in the region, we’ll be visitor quaint hill country towns.
I’m bringing aboit 14 rolls of Tri-X, but I bought 5 rolls of Ektar 100, and 5 rolls of Portra 160.
As I understand, Ektar is a little more vivid that the muted color pallets of Portra. Although I’ve never used daughter of them.
Any tips for using them? I’m assuming we’ll be going doing a lot of daytime shooting - trails, landscapes, town center shops etc. Do these provide fairly decent results at box speed and is there any advantages to rating them lower than box speed?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?