Ain't nothing natural about E100's color palette. Unless you live in Blueworld....
Ektachrome 100 saturation is fine as it is.
The problem I see time and time again is the lack of applied skill by photographers in modulating a film's saturation to suit their or the scene's requirements. That applies to Velvia, Provia and E100. A polariser in specific circumstances (diffuse/overcast light) is but an easy way to provide additional punch without wishing for the camera to be loaded with RVP60 instead.
Kodak designed E100 to have a much more natural palette than Velvia, so why do you want the unique look of E100 to appear more akin to Velvia?
Velvia 50 & 100 and E100 are used regularly in all of my landscape work.
Regarding availability, we don't have such problems here in Australia sourcing Velvia, Provia or E100 (or even some obscure films); it might be a localised/(USA) supply chain problem. In any case, photographers here by and large purchase film online because of high retail mark-ups — another factor that could be impacting availability in different markets.
Just P2 RDPIII to EI400. Done.
I'm not a "color expert" like some others, so I'm not sure If a scene like this is a good prognosticator of how well your roll of Velvia 100 stood up since its expiration - it simply isn't a colorfull scene to begin with. Do you have any other scenes from that same roll - Fall colors, rainbows, etc.?
So glad to finally use the word "prognosticator"
Who is going to set up such a lab for this?
... If there is only to be a single Ektachrome, surely the present "neutral" version is vastly preferable to a saturated version?
"...so why do you want the unique look of E100 to appear more akin to Velvia?
Because there is no Velvia...
Ain't nothing natural about E100's color palette. Unless you live in Blueworld....
These are very nice Matt.Modern E100 in 35mm:
All exposed in light that would tend to favour a shift to the blue.
The following is from an email conversation I had several years ago with an extremely reliable source. It was a response to an enquiry about when and whether we would see the newly re-introduced Ektachrome in 120 and sheet film sizes.
"As you know, based on your past writings, that 120 film uses a different base than 135 film (thickness, etc.). It, and also sheet film, also require a pelloid layer coated on the back and a different under-coat layer to insure that the film remains flatter through various humidity conditions when the film is present in the camera. New layers mean new formulas so that the formula and how we emulsion coat the 135 version can not be utilized as a drop-in for the other formats. As polyester base absorbs less water (moisture) from the emulsion, the coated effects on estar, and how the film dries are also different than 135. With the 135 version, two entire color layer structures (6 emulsion layers) required complete rebuilding because the present chemical companies that could supply us had differences that were not there in the 1999-2012 version of E100G. Once we knew a rebuild was necessary, actual improvements were “fit in” to make the film a wee bit sharper, have more stability in keeping, and for us, improve cold store keeping of the emulsions. We also adjusted the film’s sensitometric position so that the whites were whiter, and the colors more accurate. Coating additional layers and adjusting the layer structures for water & gel levels, and adjusting components to insure same sensitometry isn’t easy like some on Photrio might think."
FWIW, I prefer the current Ektachrome to the Kodachrome 64 I loved in its day. Though some of that may be due to its availability in 120.
It was funny - when I started scrolling through the easily accessed Ektachrome images that I had previously digitized, I realized that images like that are the type that I tend to use Ektachrome with.
FWIW, these were shot on the pre-2012 Ektachrome - probably the GX version, because I too liked it.
George - there never was a significantly more saturated Ektachrome than the current version.
But I've encountered light in high altitude deep shade that was more like 6500K, which in the case of either brand film, would needs something like an 81C or KR3 warming filter to reasonably tame.
Ain't nothing natural about E100's color palette. Unless you live in Blueworld....
Has anyone tried Washi X in E6 ?
Hmmm - you're right, George, there was a transient VS version of Ektachrome. I doubt I ever tried it because at that point in time I was transitioning over to color neg film and RA4 paper due to the demise of Cibachrome - specifically Portra 160VS, a good stepping stone to mastering Ektar 100 afterwards.
Modern E100 in 35mm:
View attachment 404195View attachment 404196View attachment 404197
All exposed in light that would tend to favour a shift to the blue.
The higher saturation professional version of Ektachrome 100 was VS, which I assume stood for ‘Very Saturated’. The consumer version was called “Extra Color”. I have some rolls of both still in my freezer.
They should - as I posted:The first two look blue to me.
All exposed in light that would tend to favour a shift to the blue.
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?