Comments on: Kodak Ektar 100

By: mugley

mugley — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 22:33:07 +0000

@ Ross – nothing really obvious, although shooting under mixed lighting it’s hard to tell. Certainly nothing that’d get a lomo-xpro-kiddie excited anyway.

By: rosscova

rosscova — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 06:07:26 +0000

@ Rhys: sounds like you’re getting the same magenta issue as me, so most likely it’s something in the film. It certainly seems odd, and I couldn’t quite get rid of it.

@ mugs: thanks for the link. Did you get any colour shift on the long exposures?

By: mugley

mugley — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 02:41:21 +0000

Reciprocity data here for anyone who’s interested in doing long exposures:

http://www.apug.org/forums/archive/index.php/t-57031.html

I’ve tested the times up to 30 seconds (adjusted time) and they seem to work.

By: Rhys

Rhys — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 00:29:12 +0000

It certainly has a similar “clean” look to digital, but I don’t same “plastic” feeling i get from most digital imagery. I’ve run two rolls through my Isolette3 and have been very impressed. I would say it’s magenta biased though, and I have had some issues correcting that to my satisfaction. Still, it’s the nicest colour neg film i’ve used in 120 format and will continue to try it in different conditions.

By: ziz

ziz — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 00:15:57 +0000

agree with mugley, tends to look a little “digital” and not totally dissimilar to ultracolour, blues and yellows are nice, blues probably nicer than ultracolor.

Will be curious to see how it rates in a few months time, havent shot a roll myself yet.