Toronto Photography Meetup Group

I've started shooting Ektar 100, and I absolutely love it. I've pretty much abandoned my previous film, Fuji 160S.

Anyone else shooting Ektar 100?


(accurate colours)

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/metrix_feet/3564907425/" title="Banker's Green And Gold by Metrix X, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3571/3564907425_c09c0444fc.jpg" width="332" height="500" alt="Banker's Green And Gold"></a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/metrix_feet/3565123846/" title="Old Style New Film by Metrix X, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3650/3565123846_ebb1374dd6_o.jpg" width="814" height="800" alt="Old Style New Film"></a>

It's become my go-to colour film quite rapidly.

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/mawz/3734934042/" title="St James by Mawz, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3478/3734934042_f41b3a003e.jpg" width="333" height="500" alt="St James"></a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/mawz/3697824766/" title="Cyclist in a White Dress by Mawz, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3469/3697824766_19281a72e1.jpg" width="500" height="336" alt="Cyclist in a White Dress"></a>

I've bought two rolls, I had to order them in at the Henry's in Oshawa.
I still have one roll to shoot and the first roll to get developed.

great film, only downside I've seen is that there is a strong blue cast when scanned...

There seems to be a whole bunch of different experiences with scanning Ektar. My first roll scanned with a reddish cast once I figured out the right colour balance setting then no problems with colour casts. I think the red gamma curve is a bit punchy compared to normal film so the blue cast maybe the result of over correcting the red channel.

I've had little issue scanning Ektar aside from scans with a large amount of pavement which get a strong cyan cast (An issue I've had with most C-41 films).

That said, I'm using VueScan, which makes up in part for its awful UI with extremely good colour conversions for C-41.

I'll add another one.

1.5 minute exposure

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/thericyip/3905712143/" title="Daisies by thericyip, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2665/3905712143_6651df4934.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="Daisies"></a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/thericyip/3898659599/" title=". by thericyip, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3504/3898659599_c4b94f6532.jpg" width="500" height="332" alt="."></a>

Hmm... I've been away from print film for so long I thought Ektar was E-6

I'll have to pick up a roll and give it a try.

Oh.. sorry to jump on your thread Sean but is there anywhere in the city still doing E-6 processing?

Cheers,
Dave

This looks awesome

Dave,

Downtown was still doing it last I checked.

That's what I thought - I'll have to call in and check though - I still have Velvia that is "pre-paid" by them but I have a sneaking suspicion that they're sending any E-6 out the door to an external lab.

Thanks Adam, I should just use the Velvia up - there's really no reason for me saving it

Cheers,
dave

Both Downtown and TIW do E6

deleted by walkaboutcamera

I think I just might give Ektar a try..... I am headed to Killarney later this week.


D

I'm still getting 3 hour turnaround on the Provia I shoot, so it's in-house.

$1.50 extra for prepaid stuff though, as prices went up.

I have 10 rolls of Provia 100 in 120mm that I am going to shoot off this coming weekend.

It really comes into its own for high contrast night shots
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/metrix_feet/4055904477/" title="Nighttime Spadina At Richmond by Metrix X, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3481/4055904477_0979892170_o.jpg" width="1000" alt="Nighttime Spadina At Richmond"></a>

I had a roll of expired Velvia... when did it become $15.99 to develop and mount?

September of last year.

There's a nice savings if you don't get them mounted, and they're easier to scan that way.

I'm so happy.... Ektar 100 is being released in 4x5 sheets (and 8x10).

I should give Ektar a try with my Mamiya. speaking of which... I have almost 10 rolls of film to get developed. mostly, Provia.

Hey guys, just an update.... I bought three rolls of Ektar 100, and giving it a try. Already had one roll processed, and I am going to scan it this week.

What scanning software do you guys suggest I use, as right now I only use the Epson scan software that came with my V700 scanner. I'd like to have better colour control over my scanning on the V700, as I've noticed a colour cast in the past.

Ektar has a larger dynamic range then most negative films so the Epson Auto levels doesn't work very well. If colour balance is critical I do it this way. Using the epson software in professional mode. 16 bit tiff and unsharp on low. Use the auto exposure to get initial values. Check the grey scale histogram and adjust so there is no black or white clipping. Do the same for each of the RGB channels. Scan at 2400dpi for 120 or 3200dpi for 35mm. The idea is to get a scan containing all the information it doesn't have to be beautiful at this point.

In post I apply a 3 point colour balance (black, mid grey and white) plus the normal contrast adjustments.

On a side note, do you guys cut the film yourselves into 3's when scanning?

Yes, I do.... and I have a binder with printfile sheets that I store the neg/slides in.

Stuff out of the holga:





The rest of the set here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/nub4life/s ... 426557397/

Lovin' Ektar 100!

great images!

EDIT: Ooooh, re-uploading changes all of the URLs :S So, these are updated pics with new adjustments -- I just hit the Auto levels in Aperture and then got the idea on how to proceed:

Well, I've just scanned my second roll of Ektar 35mm, and I'm still not impressed:

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/ofermod/4472277492/" title="Discarded bike by ofermod, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4070/4472277492_3029c4e0ce.jpg" width="500" height="313" alt="Discarded bike"></a>
Adjusted, but too too warm
EDIT: new adjustments didn't change it much. I guess I got the other settings right.

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/ofermod/4471509857/" title="Pedestrian bridge by ofermod, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4044/4471509857_42204de6f0.jpg" width="500" height="311" alt="Pedestrian bridge"></a>
Adjusted, too cool, and typical lens flare from the Sigma 12-24.
EDIT: A cool shot to start, it's just less cool than before. I like it much better now.

The only one I liked, is this underexposed shot:
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/ofermod/4439468055/" title="Old City Hall by ofermod, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2688/4439468055_d95565dfd1.jpg" width="314" height="500" alt="Old City Hall"></a>
But, I have doubts that this is "correct".
EDIT: I still like it out of the scanner. Won't be trying any new tricks with this one.

Honestly, after re-reading this thread it's more my scanning technique than anything.
Maybe I should just stick to scanning B+W?

As Ryan suggests, I really want to try a night shoot.