It has been 3000 years since a video has been uploaded, the glory of weeky videos has fallen into myth passed down from generation to generation until now.
I shoot mostly landscapes and architecture. I don't like editing. Until this video, I couldn't quite figure out why I liked Ektar; now all is clear! Thank you.
Personally my favorite film. I think the photos from ektar just have a really nice pop and catches the eye. It makes the world to me a lot brighter and fun with its powerful saturated colors. Even for portraits I still would consider it my favorite. I just have to be careful with skin tones and I usually just have to adjust the temperature a tiny bit to get rid of any pink skin tones
I was just in Palm Springs/Salton Sea/Joshua Tree National Park in California. I shot a mix of Portra 160, Provia 100, and Superia 400 in 35mm using a Nikon FE2 and L35AF. I also shot a mix of Portra 400 and Ektar 100 in medium format using a Yashica D. I have not yet gotten any negatives back from the lab and am so excited.
Loved this review! I shot Ektar when I was visiting Nice, and the colours came out incredible (as the city itself is filled with bright blues, pinks and yellows). Most of my photos were landscape which I think really suited this film!
I use Ektar quite a bit, pushed it to 400 at golden hour and it produced my favourite image, as a portrait. Wasn’t too over saturated in the skin tones either.
I primarily shoot travel snapshots with Ektar 100 with my 28mm Olympus XA4. Ektar does really well with scenery and cityscapes, where Portra 400 doesn’t always shine.
i shot a roll of ektar in the grand canyon and found out that my film advance was broken and got exactly zero pictures back. pretty much the worst possible thing lol
I love Ektar 100! It’s probabky one of my favorite film stocks. Especially for sunny summer days. I agree, it’s probably not ideal for portraits, however, I have had some great results shooting portraits at the beach with it on a sunny spring day.
Probably the best Negative film out there for "more considered" work. I've spent a lot of time testing and printing this film. As stated by George, not the first choice for portraits. It has been reported that it's difficult to scan - thats just not true. Like everything in life, it takes a little time to learn how to do something well. Your best friend with Ektar is Selective Colour tool in PS or the Colour Correction Tool in Capture One which is in my opinion the very best tool for working with colour film scans. The lads here at Negative Feedback are doing a tremendous job of inspiring people to get out and shoot film. Keep up the good work!
Ektar is probably my favorite color negative film. Granted, I don't shoot portraits, but I just love the colors I get in urban landscape shots, especially in late afternoon sun.
I've used ektar a couple of times as 35mm in a yashica 2000n a few years ago and I gotta say I didn't expect your comment on how it may not be so good to portraits, because I was actually pretty satisfied. but thinking about it, it does makes sense: I'm Brazilian, me and most of my friends don't really have lighter skin tones, so I didn't realized that I could have looked weird if I had subjects with pinkish or lighter undertones to their skin. Thanks for the review, we missed u!!
I gotta add that with the years, I did got tired of the saturated tones, specially bc most of the photographers in my city/state use it a lot to bring out the characteristics/personality of the local culture, so I settled for the fujifilm x-tra 400 as a quite cheaper, easier to find, option (that also didn't needed much retouch) that's not really over saturated
I've only shot one roll and somehow it became my favorite. Once I got my images edited up they really popped! So I got a bunch more of it in to shoot and I can't wait to load my next roll!
Bit late to the party on this one, but recently watched this dude sir robin (german youtube lad) trip to thailand shooting Ektar, and I was really blown away by the colors, the vibrancy, etc. Perhaps this film shines better in a tropical landscape dominated by teal blues, bright sun (or haze), lush greens and less reds/oranges. Thanks for the review! And pretty cool shots with the flash on this stock too.
I've found Ektar portraits look good in some circumstances, my best one was in the fall of a friend with red hair. Between the leafs and her hair the colors were amazing.
It turned great! And I will remember the two tips: 1. Shoot it at box speed; 2. When portraits, use it with flash for amazing cinematic look. Thank you!
I have shot Ektar before. A lot, in fact. To be fair, the first roll I've put through was at box speed... and it came out moody on half of the pictures. Mainly, because it was taken by my dad, who doesn't care about metering precisely. Decided to give it a go once more two years later, this time really leaning towards overexposure by one or two stops, and I have to tell you - the results were mezmerizingly good. Effectively no grain, even on 35mm film. Shot portraits with it as well. Overexposed by a stop or exposed correctly at 100 will give it this warm, classic colour-film look which, I think, only a Gold 200 can match. But a Gold 200 is no Ektar, that's for sure. Shot Portra 400 as well, and while I love those creamy skin tones and the impressive tonality, I think Ektar has the edge for me. Not a dealbreaker, but still. Cheers!
Last year I went on a trip to india and shot both Ektar and Portra and actually my Ektar turned out quite well, especially due to the colorfulness of India, so I'm going to get some more ektar for my upcoming trip to Indonesia in a few weeks
I agree, I would rather use portra and punch it up if needed. I often get weird colour casts with ektar, I think it’s harder to expose well and develop properly.
I got a roll of 120 out of curiosity to try it out, ran it through my mat124g on some landscapes, and oh my I fell in love with the grain. It’s not as versatile as Portra or Fuji pro 400h that can be used for both landscapes and portraits and everything in between, but if I know that I’m only going to be shooting landscapes it’s my go to film
If you try Ektar again do it in the UK with some overcast lighting. I don't like it either in harsh light, all the shots I've taken with Ektar that I liked are in subdued lighting
Totally agree. Most people automatically assume that because it's ISO 100 and punchy that bright sunny conditions are ideal for it, but the best results I've gotten have been in gray or low light.
I do agree with you about Ektar film, a colour satured film that has a good dynamic range and must be exposed with precision. I use it a lot for landscapes especially at the present time to capture the vivid colours of fall. I did try it for portraits but it was pretty harsh to find natural skin tones using post treatment software, therefore as you do, I will stick to portra for my portraits. The now deceased fuji reala was able to do both, it was an amazing film, maybe the best ever...
Glad you're back on the scene! I'm not a massive fan of super-saturated punchy look of Ektar although it always seems to look amazing in desert landscapes!
Very nice, objective review. I personally love this film. Although it is saturated, the richness and particular RGB tones it renders really blow me away.
Welcome back! I have a cheap ass point and shoot with a flash that I use for when I go out to the bar or parties with friends and I almost exclusively use ektar for the exact reason you described. The flash with the colors of the film work great together. Other than that tho, I never really use it for anything else
Yep I'm with you George, I much prefer shooting Ektar for landscapes than portraits. But I usually default to Fujicolor for a lot of my work. Mostly because it is so readily available. Good to see new videos from you though. -Shane
Thanks for the tips and nice to see you back! I've never tried it, but I suppose it could be very similar to the film I'm using for the Polaroid, which is very close to the 100 ISO settings and give that sort of red/pink tones sometimes. It's something to get used to. You're right about the portraits, it looks great on the landscapes though. Your photos are beautiful. Hope you had a nice trip! Looking forward to your next video.
So glad you're back!! I kinda enjoy the look of the underexposed portaits of a darker skinned model that I got with my second roll. She wanted something dreamy and saturated so it worked fine. and the first one was cityscape so I can totally see the appeal for landscape shooters, but it's not for me. I've still got a roll so maybe I'll overexpose it like one commenter suggested...
I used to take landscape photos with ektar and a mamiya 6 and got frustrated because I didn't know if I was doing something wrong when scanning the negatives. The images were extremely saturated to the point where the actual tones of the landscape were transformed. Maybe it was the combo of 1pm super hard sunlight + ektar + maybe using the wrong profile in the digitalization process haha. But seeing your results were similar as mine (not in a bad way, mine were extreme) gives me the confidence that it was most probably because of the film. The editing process was so tedious, but now I'm sticking to Portra 160. Anyway, thanks for the video! (and for waiting until you could shoot a warm landscape, it was veeery useful!)
In my experience the only time skin tones went into the red was either in shadows or under exposure. Try a portrait shoot with one stop over exposure. You might like it.
Ektar is one of my all-time favourite films, but I also don't really shoot portraits so that may be why. Anything natural will look magnificent on Ektar.
I bought a box of Ektar 120 rolls a couple of years back and shot a couple of them, but they came back with the numbers/logos from the backing paper showing on the negatives. I've still got three rolls left but I've been put off using Ektar since. The results were otherwise nice, although I completely agree regarding skin tones. Definitely not a portrait film if you're shooting someone with light skin.
I live in S Cal and Ektar is my favorite color film. I solve the skin color issue by having two camera bodies. One has landscape film and the other people or all around. So Ektar and Portra makes a good combo for me in two bodies that share lenses, flash, filters, and so on.
Thank you for this video. I totally agree with you, portraits turn out to be too red or too pink. I'm using this only for autumn landscapes or summer photos from my vacation. I like it though, especially when Velvia is too expensive to buy and develop. Kodak film also has this warmer white balance which I really like. I haven't used Fuji film for few years.
I've been shooting ektar off and on for a while and I really like it, but for very specific circumstances like you said. I feel like its not super versatile, but if you shoot it at the right place and time it has lots of emotion. loved these shots man
I've never shot Ektar before because of how it performs in certain situations. I've seen pictures taken with Ektar which are beautiful and make me want to shoot it but I've also seen pictures taken with Ektar that look pretty disgusting so there's a bit of uncertainty about picking up a roll. I primarily shoot portraits so I'm not sure how the skin tones would look and finding people willing to have their portraits taken is quite hard so when I do get the chance to shoot them I don't want to be leaving the look of the film up to chance, I'd rather grab some Portra or even some Colourplus (I think it's underrated) and be comfortable knowing that the colours will come out more predictably and to my liking. After watching this I think I'll put a roll through my point and shoot and take some quick flash shots for a bit of fun.
I don't do portraits in color, I only do them in b&w. I only use color film, if colors are the main reason to take the photo. And I think, for that the Ektar is perfect, I don't know of any other film providing more saturated color. I usually use 60-100 years old mf folders as my camera, which generally don't have magazines, but are cheap. So I mostly carry at least two of them with me loaded with different film. One of them has always Ektar loaded - and is the camera I use the least, because I'm typically a b&w shooter.
Thanks for this. Yes, it's a film for landscape and architecture. I also use it for repro-qualiy images of artwork. My first choice for the latter was always Agfachrome RSX 50. for the perfect colour fidelity. There is nothing like it now. Ektar is good but still needs more correction than RSX 50 ever did. For some Australian landscape where there are eucalyptus forests, I do prefer Portra because Ektar will destroy the subtle blue/grey hues. If any printing is to be done in the UK I need to stand over them with a big stick to make sure they don't pump up the yellows and overall saturation, bevause THEY like it that way. I had to throw out a 2000 piece order because the people doing the work had never been to Australia.
Iv’e recently used Ektar 100 for the first time. I shot it in Tuscany, Italy and I am quite satisfied with the results. The colourful houses and the blue Mediterranean Sea come through very well! But I have to agree that this film is in my opinion absolutely not suitable for portraits. Thanks for uploading!
Literally have a box of Ektar in my fridge for a really sunny day. I have heard it does not do well in low light or clouds and also the issues with skin on portraits. I will shoot it though and see how it turns out for me
I quite like ektar for portraits but it's very much dependent on the background setting. I think the reddish skin hue has less impact where any scene behind looks more summer-y, I use it on holiday a lot but i definitely wouldn't use it much for portraits back in the north east!
Have you ever tried EKTAR in studio I think it’ll be a good approach... since you can barely notice the grain... and of course it will look closer to a digital image... if you can make a video about it will be good to watch
I think, people now using film as a digital intermediate, Porta makes a lot of sense. Personally, I have started printing colour in the darkroom and I'm enjoying that more than going through the digital, so a more saturated and contrasty negative film makes sense, because that's what I like in my prints - and adjusting contrast/saturation in colour darkroom printing is basically not a thing.
You touched on it briefly, but using Ektar on darker skin tones, actually looks pretty cool. And shooting in the bluer white balance of midday versus late afternoon offers interesting results. Agree, that for light skinned Caucasian tones, it's not good. I love the way reds, blues and yellows look, on this film.
all analog folks miss you dude, thanks for your review about ektar. For my opinion, ektar is very suitable for use in America (idk if in another country), cause it feels like we are taken to the age of wild wild west memories (cowboy and marlboro cigarette). my suggest, if we want use in the right way and in the right purpose, maybe we can do some research for the right way to use this film, until it suit with your concept that you make. Thank you
Wow, i am looking for a review of Ektar and you posted this 😍 i watched all of your vids, you inspired me a lot. Thank you so much, hope to see more of your video soon. I'm from Vietnam, sorry for my bad English 😂!
The desert pictures look a bit underexposed. Underexposure is common in such scenes because the scene is brighter than average, sometimes quite a bit. A general scene metering will then underexpose. If shooting in daylight in the American SW, give Ektar an extra half to full stop of exposure because is it not the wide latitude, " close is good enough" film that we associated with color negative film generally.
I scan my film using a DSLR, and found Portra extremely difficult to make the colors look right. Ektar in the other hand is very easy to bring the colors to what they should be like. Dinamic range of Ekar is good, but indeed exposing correctly is more important than other films. Probably the film with the most stupidly wide dynamic range I have tried is Delta 100.
Subtle flex done well at 1:44 with those black 500s 🤔 actually IMO contrasty portraits with harsh light and deep shadows would look insteresting with this film
He has returned ✨
please return too Willem! I love your videos
Nicolas Hansmann soon soon ❤️❤️✨
hahaha yeah dude its been awhile
IS THAT PAPA POLAROID?!???!!?!?!?!!!
Whoahhhhh you were in my neck of the woods! So cool! Great video, informative as always
It has been 3000 years since a video has been uploaded, the glory of weeky videos has fallen into myth passed down from generation to generation until now.
I shoot mostly landscapes and architecture. I don't like editing. Until this video, I couldn't quite figure out why I liked Ektar; now all is clear! Thank you.
i am completely soothed and educated by this video
Pls do a video on your work with BROCKHAMPTON !
Personally my favorite film. I think the photos from ektar just have a really nice pop and catches the eye. It makes the world to me a lot brighter and fun with its powerful saturated colors. Even for portraits I still would consider it my favorite. I just have to be careful with skin tones and I usually just have to adjust the temperature a tiny bit to get rid of any pink skin tones
&Adzima Visual Arts, try Ektachrome. No problem with skin tones, they’re gorgeous.
I was just in Palm Springs/Salton Sea/Joshua Tree National Park in California. I shot a mix of Portra 160, Provia 100, and Superia 400 in 35mm using a Nikon FE2 and L35AF. I also shot a mix of Portra 400 and Ektar 100 in medium format using a Yashica D. I have not yet gotten any negatives back from the lab and am so excited.
Loved this review! I shot Ektar when I was visiting Nice, and the colours came out incredible (as the city itself is filled with bright blues, pinks and yellows). Most of my photos were landscape which I think really suited this film!
I use Ektar quite a bit, pushed it to 400 at golden hour and it produced my favourite image, as a portrait. Wasn’t too over saturated in the skin tones either.
I primarily shoot travel snapshots with Ektar 100 with my 28mm Olympus XA4. Ektar does really well with scenery and cityscapes, where Portra 400 doesn’t always shine.
actually love the original photos, givin' me some kind of chills
i shot a roll of ektar in the grand canyon and found out that my film advance was broken and got exactly zero pictures back. pretty much the worst possible thing lol
lol
that's happened to me more times than i can count... what a nightmare, sorry man
I love Ektar 100! It’s probabky one of my favorite film stocks. Especially for sunny summer days. I agree, it’s probably not ideal for portraits, however, I have had some great results shooting portraits at the beach with it on a sunny spring day.
I missed you 😓
It been a long long time . The king is back.
Probably the best Negative film out there for "more considered" work. I've spent a lot of time testing and printing this film. As stated by George, not the first choice for portraits. It has been reported that it's difficult to scan - thats just not true. Like everything in life, it takes a little time to learn how to do something well. Your best friend with Ektar is Selective Colour tool in PS or the Colour Correction Tool in Capture One which is in my opinion the very best tool for working with colour film scans. The lads here at Negative Feedback are doing a tremendous job of inspiring people to get out and shoot film. Keep up the good work!
I had great success with Ektar in the fall, I feel that it does a great job rendering the vibrant colors.
I get so excited when I get the notification that you post! Best film photography channel I know!!!!
Ektar is probably my favorite color negative film. Granted, I don't shoot portraits, but I just love the colors I get in urban landscape shots, especially in late afternoon sun.
I’m sure you’ve heard this a lot
Please review Ektachrome
It hasn't come back put yet to my knowledge
photogchik007 in a sense it hasn’t. It’s back on shelves, but has been quickly sold out (except for the super 8 version)
It will happen at some point
Glad you're back, perfect review for what I need right now. Thanks for your thoughts on Ektar!
I've used ektar a couple of times as 35mm in a yashica 2000n a few years ago and I gotta say I didn't expect your comment on how it may not be so good to portraits, because I was actually pretty satisfied. but thinking about it, it does makes sense: I'm Brazilian, me and most of my friends don't really have lighter skin tones, so I didn't realized that I could have looked weird if I had subjects with pinkish or lighter undertones to their skin. Thanks for the review, we missed u!!
I gotta add that with the years, I did got tired of the saturated tones, specially bc most of the photographers in my city/state use it a lot to bring out the characteristics/personality of the local culture, so I settled for the fujifilm x-tra 400 as a quite cheaper, easier to find, option (that also didn't needed much retouch) that's not really over saturated
I shoot it at 50 ASA and it works perfectly, also I love it for portraits even though I'd agree that magenta tends to pop out in the skin
Yes! You’re back.
it was cool to see one of my favorite photography youtubers meet/hang out/work with my favorite boyband
Back with incredible photos!
hey! i think it it the most honest video i've seen so far about ektar 100.
One of my favorite negative film and still available.
ektar is my all time fav color emulsion, its just fantastic.
I've only shot one roll and somehow it became my favorite. Once I got my images edited up they really popped! So I got a bunch more of it in to shoot and I can't wait to load my next roll!
Bit late to the party on this one, but recently watched this dude sir robin (german youtube lad) trip to thailand shooting Ektar, and I was really blown away by the colors, the vibrancy, etc. Perhaps this film shines better in a tropical landscape dominated by teal blues, bright sun (or haze), lush greens and less reds/oranges. Thanks for the review! And pretty cool shots with the flash on this stock too.
I've found Ektar portraits look good in some circumstances, my best one was in the fall of a friend with red hair. Between the leafs and her hair the colors were amazing.
Nice pictures! However, some of the 6x6-shots look as they have a haze over then. Is the lens fogged?
Probably the scan is not contrast corrected in post.
It turned great! And I will remember the two tips:
1. Shoot it at box speed;
2. When portraits, use it with flash for amazing cinematic look.
Thank you!
I have shot Ektar before. A lot, in fact. To be fair, the first roll I've put through was at box speed... and it came out moody on half of the pictures. Mainly, because it was taken by my dad, who doesn't care about metering precisely. Decided to give it a go once more two years later, this time really leaning towards overexposure by one or two stops, and I have to tell you - the results were mezmerizingly good. Effectively no grain, even on 35mm film. Shot portraits with it as well. Overexposed by a stop or exposed correctly at 100 will give it this warm, classic colour-film look which, I think, only a Gold 200 can match. But a Gold 200 is no Ektar, that's for sure. Shot Portra 400 as well, and while I love those creamy skin tones and the impressive tonality, I think Ektar has the edge for me. Not a dealbreaker, but still. Cheers!
Last year I went on a trip to india and shot both Ektar and Portra and actually my Ektar turned out quite well, especially due to the colorfulness of India, so I'm going to get some more ektar for my upcoming trip to Indonesia in a few weeks
YES. My favorite color film!
Me too!!!
Mine also!
Same! For some reason Ektar just hits the colors like I want them.it's a beautiful film.
I agree, I would rather use portra and punch it up if needed. I often get weird colour casts with ektar, I think it’s harder to expose well and develop properly.
Looks a nice film for bright sunny Autumn days!
Thanks soo much, I was searching for a review of Ektar 100 today but couldn't find a good one.. Perfect timing man!
What a pleasant surprise!
I got a roll of 120 out of curiosity to try it out, ran it through my mat124g on some landscapes, and oh my I fell in love with the grain. It’s not as versatile as Portra or Fuji pro 400h that can be used for both landscapes and portraits and everything in between, but if I know that I’m only going to be shooting landscapes it’s my go to film
If you try Ektar again do it in the UK with some overcast lighting. I don't like it either in harsh light, all the shots I've taken with Ektar that I liked are in subdued lighting
Totally agree. Most people automatically assume that because it's ISO 100 and punchy that bright sunny conditions are ideal for it, but the best results I've gotten have been in gray or low light.
I do agree with you about Ektar film, a colour satured film that has a good dynamic range and must be exposed with precision. I use it a lot for landscapes especially at the present time to capture the vivid colours of fall. I did try it for portraits but it was pretty harsh to find natural skin tones using post treatment software, therefore as you do, I will stick to portra for my portraits. The now deceased fuji reala was able to do both, it was an amazing film, maybe the best ever...
Glad you're back on the scene! I'm not a massive fan of super-saturated punchy look of Ektar although it always seems to look amazing in desert landscapes!
Very nice, objective review. I personally love this film. Although it is saturated, the richness and particular RGB tones it renders really blow me away.
You really inspire me and i've come think a great deal of you. Love your Videos and your Photos. I would love to see more in the Future !
Ektachrome gives the saturation of Ektar and the skin tones are banging!!
Welcome back! I have a cheap ass point and shoot with a flash that I use for when I go out to the bar or parties with friends and I almost exclusively use ektar for the exact reason you described. The flash with the colors of the film work great together. Other than that tho, I never really use it for anything else
Ektar pushed in lower, more dramatic light looks fantastic and closer to slide film in some ways. I usually shoot it at 320 and push it 2 stops.
welcome back
I mainly shoot landscape at the beaches and mountains in california and ektar works a dream.
Yep I'm with you George, I much prefer shooting Ektar for landscapes than portraits. But I usually default to Fujicolor for a lot of my work. Mostly because it is so readily available. Good to see new videos from you though. -Shane
Thanks for the tips and nice to see you back! I've never tried it, but I suppose it could be very similar to the film I'm using for the Polaroid, which is very close to the 100 ISO settings and give that sort of red/pink tones sometimes. It's something to get used to. You're right about the portraits, it looks great on the landscapes though. Your photos are beautiful. Hope you had a nice trip! Looking forward to your next video.
So glad you're back!! I kinda enjoy the look of the underexposed portaits of a darker skinned model that I got with my second roll. She wanted something dreamy and saturated so it worked fine. and the first one was cityscape so I can totally see the appeal for landscape shooters, but it's not for me. I've still got a roll so maybe I'll overexpose it like one commenter suggested...
I used to take landscape photos with ektar and a mamiya 6 and got frustrated because I didn't know if I was doing something wrong when scanning the negatives. The images were extremely saturated to the point where the actual tones of the landscape were transformed. Maybe it was the combo of 1pm super hard sunlight + ektar + maybe using the wrong profile in the digitalization process haha. But seeing your results were similar as mine (not in a bad way, mine were extreme) gives me the confidence that it was most probably because of the film. The editing process was so tedious, but now I'm sticking to Portra 160. Anyway, thanks for the video! (and for waiting until you could shoot a warm landscape, it was veeery useful!)
Pd: My photos with Ektar + Mamiya 6 also came out a bit hazy, do you know what could be happening?
In my experience the only time skin tones went into the red was either in shadows or under exposure. Try a portrait shoot with one stop over exposure. You might like it.
whew these are GORGEOUS
Ektar is one of my all-time favourite films, but I also don't really shoot portraits so that may be why. Anything natural will look magnificent on Ektar.
I bought a box of Ektar 120 rolls a couple of years back and shot a couple of them, but they came back with the numbers/logos from the backing paper showing on the negatives. I've still got three rolls left but I've been put off using Ektar since. The results were otherwise nice, although I completely agree regarding skin tones. Definitely not a portrait film if you're shooting someone with light skin.
WELCOME BACK
I live in S Cal and Ektar is my favorite color film. I solve the skin color issue by having two camera bodies. One has landscape film and the other people or all around. So Ektar and Portra makes a good combo for me in two bodies that share lenses, flash, filters, and so on.
Ektar100 is my favourite, definitly.
Thank you for this video. I totally agree with you, portraits turn out to be too red or too pink. I'm using this only for autumn landscapes
or summer photos from my vacation. I like it though, especially when Velvia is too expensive to buy and develop. Kodak film also has this warmer white balance which I really like. I haven't used Fuji film for few years.
I've been shooting ektar off and on for a while and I really like it, but for very specific circumstances like you said. I feel like its not super versatile, but if you shoot it at the right place and time it has lots of emotion. loved these shots man
I've never shot Ektar before because of how it performs in certain situations. I've seen pictures taken with Ektar which are beautiful and make me want to shoot it but I've also seen pictures taken with Ektar that look pretty disgusting so there's a bit of uncertainty about picking up a roll. I primarily shoot portraits so I'm not sure how the skin tones would look and finding people willing to have their portraits taken is quite hard so when I do get the chance to shoot them I don't want to be leaving the look of the film up to chance, I'd rather grab some Portra or even some Colourplus (I think it's underrated) and be comfortable knowing that the colours will come out more predictably and to my liking. After watching this I think I'll put a roll through my point and shoot and take some quick flash shots for a bit of fun.
Donny Cheetham, try Ektachrome for portraits. Amazing, IMO.
Haven’t shot much Ektar but maybe I’ll give it a go soon. Really like the flash look with it.
please review the new old Ektachrome too now that it's released
always a fan kodak, especially ektar
Ektar pushed one stop, is amazing
The pictures have gotten a lot better!!! Keep it up! :)
I don't do portraits in color, I only do them in b&w. I only use color film, if colors are the main reason to take the photo. And I think, for that the Ektar is perfect, I don't know of any other film providing more saturated color. I usually use 60-100 years old mf folders as my camera, which generally don't have magazines, but are cheap. So I mostly carry at least two of them with me loaded with different film. One of them has always Ektar loaded - and is the camera I use the least, because I'm typically a b&w shooter.
Thanks for this. Yes, it's a film for landscape and architecture.
I also use it for repro-qualiy images of artwork.
My first choice for the latter was always Agfachrome RSX 50. for the perfect colour fidelity. There is nothing like it now. Ektar is good but still needs more correction than RSX 50 ever did.
For some Australian landscape where there are eucalyptus forests, I do prefer Portra because Ektar will destroy the subtle blue/grey hues. If any printing is to be done in the UK I need to stand over them with a big stick to make sure they don't pump up the yellows and overall saturation, bevause THEY like it that way. I had to throw out a 2000 piece order because the people doing the work had never been to Australia.
Iv’e recently used Ektar 100 for the first time. I shot it in Tuscany, Italy and I am quite satisfied with the results. The colourful houses and the blue Mediterranean Sea come through very well! But I have to agree that this film is in my opinion absolutely not suitable for portraits. Thanks for uploading!
I love this film! I actually really like the portraits, it's a kind of dreamy effect :)
Literally have a box of Ektar in my fridge for a really sunny day. I have heard it does not do well in low light or clouds and also the issues with skin on portraits. I will shoot it though and see how it turns out for me
I have a roll of Ektar which I think i'll save for my holiday to Hawaii, never shot with it before so this video helped. Thanks :)
Ektar with flash works well
Don’t like it too much when I shot it last week, some buildings some people
Stoked to try it with flash tho
I quite like ektar for portraits but it's very much dependent on the background setting. I think the reddish skin hue has less impact where any scene behind looks more summer-y, I use it on holiday a lot but i definitely wouldn't use it much for portraits back in the north east!
Welcome Back
Have you ever tried EKTAR in studio I think it’ll be a good approach... since you can barely notice the grain... and of course it will look closer to a digital image... if you can make a video about it will be good to watch
I think, people now using film as a digital intermediate, Porta makes a lot of sense. Personally, I have started printing colour in the darkroom and I'm enjoying that more than going through the digital, so a more saturated and contrasty negative film makes sense, because that's what I like in my prints - and adjusting contrast/saturation in colour darkroom printing is basically not a thing.
Oh I was hoping ektar would be good with flash. That’s great to know.
Finally a new NF video!
You touched on it briefly, but using Ektar on darker skin tones, actually looks pretty cool. And shooting in the bluer white balance of midday versus late afternoon offers interesting results. Agree, that for light skinned Caucasian tones, it's not good.
I love the way reds, blues and yellows look, on this film.
all analog folks miss you dude, thanks for your review about ektar. For my opinion, ektar is very suitable for use in America (idk if in another country), cause it feels like we are taken to the age of wild wild west memories (cowboy and marlboro cigarette). my suggest, if we want use in the right way and in the right purpose, maybe we can do some research for the right way to use this film, until it suit with your concept that you make. Thank you
Great pics 👍🏻
I've only shot really tan people with Ektar and now I know why it looked so good..
Nice review - What’s up with vignetting in your shots?
Missed your videos man
Wow, i am looking for a review of Ektar and you posted this 😍 i watched all of your vids, you inspired me a lot. Thank you so much, hope to see more of your video soon.
I'm from Vietnam, sorry for my bad English 😂!
The desert pictures look a bit underexposed. Underexposure is common in such scenes because the scene is brighter than average, sometimes quite a bit. A general scene metering will then underexpose. If shooting in daylight in the American SW, give Ektar an extra half to full stop of exposure because is it not the wide latitude, " close is good enough" film that we associated with color negative film generally.
I scan my film using a DSLR, and found Portra extremely difficult to make the colors look right. Ektar in the other hand is very easy to bring the colors to what they should be like. Dinamic range of Ekar is good, but indeed exposing correctly is more important than other films. Probably the film with the most stupidly wide dynamic range I have tried is Delta 100.
Please do a video how do you edit your portra scans 🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽
When you say you usually push your colour negative by a stop, do you then push process the film or just develop as normal?
Subtle flex done well at 1:44 with those black 500s 🤔 actually IMO contrasty portraits with harsh light and deep shadows would look insteresting with this film
I just bought a roll of this and it arrived yesterday, put it in my K1000 today. We'll see how it turns out....
Is portra the heavy hitter in the freezer for your work? Also, at what point does it become counter-productive to shoot film and edit in post?
Ektar can work well with old cars and very bright architecture.