New venture - color film - Ektar & Portra

[ChristopherCoy]

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?

 

[Vincent Peri]

I've shot Ektar 100, but haven't gotten around to having prints made yet. I read somewhere that Ektar is not as forgiving of over/under exposures the way other films are, so I was very careful to meter properly.

Now that the US (where I live) is gradually recovering from the Covid 19 pandemic and photo labs are starting to accept processing orders again, I'm looking for a good lab to make 8x10 prints for me. Any suggestions as to some good labs I can try?

Thanks.

 

[JWMster]

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.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

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.

Thanks. There's probably going to be a lot of landscape/nature photos as we'll be visiting natural falls, rock slabs, and state parks. I'll probably use Ektar for those. When we visit the little town squares and antique shops etc, I'll probably use the Portra. The F5 will be my color camera, and the F100 is going to be my B&W camera.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Treat Ektar more like transparency (i.e. base exposure on holding highlight detail) or you can get a fairly nasty colour crossover which can make cyanic skies etc. Portra can be exposed more like regular neg film & is quite difficult to truly screw up. Portra 160 is largely neutral with less intense saturation, Ektar is very neutral balanced with quite strong saturation. Compared to transparency, Ektar will roughly get you 2 stops deeper into the shadows - if the exposure of both is keyed to the highlights of the scene.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Important tip, applicable to both Portra and Ektar: remember to remove the yellow or orange sky-darkening filters (for B&W) from your lens before loading the color stock...

 

[MultiFormat Shooter]

...I'm looking for a good lab to make 8x10 prints for me. Any suggestions as to some good labs I can try?

Thanks.

If you're looking for optical enlargements, try Icon LA, LTI Lightside, or Praus Productions. Praus doesn't list printing on the website, but they will do it, if you call them. Praus has done 16" x 24" optical enlargements for me, from 35mm Kodak Ektar negatives, and I was very pleased with the results.

I have no affiliation with any of the above companies, other than being a satisfied customer of Praus.

 

[koraks]

Do these provide fairly decent results at box speed and is there any advantages to rating them lower than box speed?

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.

 

[Paul Howell]

Both are professional films (meaning very tight margins for exposure and developing, great grain and I keep mine refrigerated.) I like both, as noted above I find Porta is best for flesh tones. When traveling I shoot Kodacolor gold 200, less fussy about exposure, does not need refrigeration, overall travels well. When I take Extar I keep in a cooler, a ice pack to keep it cool but not cold.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

BWhen I take Extar I keep in a cooler, a ice pack to keep it cool but not cold.

Why do they need to be kept in a cooler?

 

[Paul Howell]

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.

STORAGE AND HANDLING Store unexposed film at 21°C (70°F) or lower in the original sealed package. For extended periods, store film at 13°C (55°F) to preserve consistency. To avoid moisture condensation on film that has been refrigerated, allow the film to warm up to room temperature before opening the package. Typical warm-up times are given in the table below. Load and unload roll-film cameras in subdued light. Total darkness is required when you load and unload sheet film holders. Process film as soon as possible after exposure. Protect negatives from strong light, and store them in a cool, dry place. For long-term storage, keep negatives at a temperature between 2°C (35°F) and 13°C (55°F) and at a relative humidity between 30 and 35 percent. EXPOSURE Film Speed Use the speed numbers in the tables below with cameras or meters marked for ISO, ASA, or DIN speeds or exposure indexes (EIs). Do not change the film-speed setting when metering through a filter. Metering through filters may affect light meter accuracy; see your meter or camera manual for specific information. For critical work, make a series of test exposures. * For best results without special printing. Size Warm-Up Times (Hours) to Reach Room Temperature of 21°C (70°F) From a Storage Temperature of: -18°C (0°F) 2°C (35°F) 13°C (55°F) 135 magazine 11⁄2 11⁄4 1 120 1 3⁄4 1⁄2 10-sheet box 11⁄2 1 1

 

[ChristopherCoy]

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.

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.

 

[koraks]

The problem with color shifts as a result of temperature is nostly about long-term storage. Taking some film out of the fridge/freezer and carrying it around under reasonable conditions (don't leave it on your dashboard in full sun) for a few days won't result in problems. Obviously it doesn't necessarily hurt to keep it temperature conditioned all the time, but carrying around ice packs etc is really overkill.

 

[Paul Howell]

My understanding is that the dyes couples are not as quite as stable with Professional Color films, either Kodak or Fuji. In the old days of commercial work, color fidelity was a big deal, color meters, color correction filters, color patches used a bench mark in the first frame. If you were shooting for a catalog and the dress was a particular shade of yellow the picture in the catalog had be an exact match, or as close as humanly possible . As I print R4 with an enlarger, not having to adjust the color pack to compensate for any color shift is a time savor.

 

[MattKing]

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.

Arguably the same argument exists for keeping amateur and professional films cool - it ensures consistent colour response.
Most users of amateur films have more flexible requirements for films, so there is less need for that.
Historically, amateur films were designed with the built in assumption they would spend some time on shelves at room temperature or warmer, so their initial colour balance was a bit different. They were also designed to withstand harsh conditions a bit better - probably at at least a marginal reduction of colour fidelity. I'm not convinced that those historical design parameters still apply.
Amateur films are generally a bit higher in contrast.
If you want consistent, repeatable, accurate colour, use professional films and keep them reasonably cool - at least be sure they don't get hot.

 

[Paul Howell]

The problem with color shifts as a result of temperature is nostly about long-term storage. Taking some film out of the fridge/freezer and carrying it around under reasonable conditions (don't leave it on your dashboard in full sun) for a few days won't result in problems.

LIkely true,but I don't want to take any chances, on a photo trip, may not ever go that way again, once in a life time shot, why risk it? Which is why I do shoot Kodacolor as well as Ektar when traveling. Kodakcolor is about bulletproof.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

If you want consistent, repeatable, accurate colour, use professional films and keep them reasonably cool - at least be sure they don't get hot.

I wouldn't keep any film in the car, or extreme heat, whether it be "pro" or "amatuer". But I'm not packing a cooler to keep 10 rolls of film in.

 

[DREW WILEY]

The assumption is that a "pro film" user thinks like a pro and wants highly predictable results, and therefore wants his film stored cool at peak performance until use, whereas an amateur film is marketed to lesser expectations with a degree of shift in mind. Therefore you should be aware of optimal storage and transport conditions yourself if anticipating pro results. But back to the more basic question. Expose Ektar at box speed with careful metering. Don't rely on any of that "latitude" talk nonsense. Also bring along correction filters for abnormal color temp lighting - for example, an 81A or KR1.5 light amber filter for overcast bluish skies, a 1B pinkish skylight filter for minor warming, and potentially something stronger like a KR3 for deep blue shade conditions. 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 intelligently used, Ektar is capable of more accurate and indeed saturated hues across the board than other color neg films, but won't be forgiving in portraiture applications like Portra 160. Both are wonderful films, but with very different personalities.

 

[JensH]

...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.

Dear Drew,

that is exactly what I observed.
I love Portra 160 and 400, but it's too much yellow isn't great for landscapes etc. outdoors.
How about adding a light blue filter to compensate? Which one would you recommand - is a 82A enorgh?

Best wishes
Jens

 

[Paul Howell]

I use a lunch size cooler, the kind that has a blue freeze pack, like this, I got 2 at walmart, under $10.00 each.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Interesting question. I do sometimes carry a pale blue conversion filter for sake of hypothetical correction of the dye curve interaction in an overtly warm scene, like lighting from a strong orange sunset. But I've yet to encounter an appropriate situation. I have photographed a number of rich bronze or amber sunsets on Maui using no filter at all with Ektar, which printed very true to real color (Portra did not, nor would it under filtration, though you could experiment). So the color temp balance issue with Ektar per se seems to mainly involve the repro of blue/cyan hues. But it's a double-edged sword. I avoided corrective filtration to capture the stunning true turquoise color of tropical bays. 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. The pricier coated version they term a "Digital" filter for irrelevant marketing reasons. It's an 812 series filter, and too strong for some applications, so not a substitute for those filters I already mentioned, but is designed for eliminating excess blue from shadows under open bright skies. Mixed light situations are a topic a bit too involved for this particular thread.

 

[JensH]

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.

Hi again,

I'm a fan of "hardware color grading" too.
Cyan contamination of blue shadows and blue sky is the problem.
Such a 81B + skylight filter should work here for the blue, but would shift the grays from slightly warm to light orange if I imagine that correctly... ?!
Anyway, some 82 series and KB filters are at hand, so I'll do a test on a 120 film...

Best
Jens

 

[DREW WILEY]

Like I said, that particular 812 filter might be too strong for some applications. But given that fact it selectively trims cyanish-blue more than other hues, given a modest filter factor of maybe half a stop extra exposure, it will allow a degree of post-correct back the other direction far more easily than the opposite possibility, since cyan crossover mainly occurs in relation to blue repro, and is the most predictable culprit in open sun situations. True differential exposure of shadows versus lighter shades requires careful pre-flashing of the film using a warming diffuser - doable, but a delaying nuisance and not entirely predictable. Of course, you could simply create an effect similar to the Tiffen 812 by combining a pink skylight filter with an 81B amber or, better yet, a modest KR equivalent. You ideally want something more reddish than just an 81 series to specifically counteract the cyan. It takes some experience, especially if one shoots at high altitude like I often do. But I don't want to overcomplicate the subject. For basic tourism, just a 1B skylight filter and an 81A or KR1.5 modest warming filter should cover most situations with Ektar. The skylight filter won't need any exposure compensation, and an 81A only a third of a stop. As far as "latitude" goes, the wiggle room for good hue reproduction is less than just getting an image. Realistically, it's about one stop extra either side of what a typical chrome film delivers. So if you can accurately expose color slides, Ektar should be easy. I wouldn't worry much about Portra unless it gets underexposed somehow.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

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?

Shoot them at box speed. Ektar is nice and punchy like color slide film, Portra 160 is nice if you have a lot of skin tones. They both deliver full film speed so there's no need to shoot them at anything other than box speed if you're shooting in the middle of the day.

 

[Agulliver]

If you are a professional shooting multiple rolls for one project, it may well be vital that every roll behaves exactly the same way with regard to colour rendition, contrast and sensitivity. Hence the general advice to shoot pro films from the same batch and to be careful how you store them. That said, while I am an amateur I do notice differences between film stocks and I have never noticed any film stock of any kind suffer due to a couple of days in the heat.

Ektar and Portra do behave differently. For landscapes I'd first choose Fuji Superia but Ektar is a good choice too especially if there are any objects other than green trees/plants. The caveat with Ektar is don't over expose it if you're main subject includes a Caucasian person. It can have a tendency to overdo the reds. Whereas Portra renders most human skin tones wonderfully as that was the purpose of the film. Portra's colours are much more subtle and muted than Ektar and I wouldn't choose it for landscapes. I might choose it for close up photos of animals, but if you want any colours to "pop" then use Ektar. I love Ektar on flower gardens, it really is superb.