Kodak 6031330 Professional Ektar 100/36 Colour Negative Film

Product Information

Especially when you consider I was losing daylight by the time I shot that, hence why I was looking for something to shoot with a wider aperture.

Color films like Gold, Portra, ColorPlus, and UltraMax from Kodak provide a much more affordable approach to learning color film photography. For a colour negative film it is very similar to slide film quality, but with the ease of C41 development. For a more detailed look into what I thought about Kodak ColorPlus 200, make sure to check out my Kodak ColorPlus 200 Reviewtoo. A late attempt to win in the compact market was hit by the rise of mobile photography and bankruptcy followed in 2012. The images that are underexposed tend to render muddy colors and overexposed images tend to look slightly washed out.The downside is that if you underexpose the image, the colors can turn muddy and if you overexpose the image, the colors give off a more pastel and washed out vibe. This color negative film (C-41 process) was available in 25, 100, 400, and 1000 ISO, and was marketed as a semi-professional, fine-grain, ultra-saturated color film suitable for product photography, landscapes, and studio work. What it is happens to be a high resolution film that provides sharp results and makes for an amazing fine art film. I have noticed however that I like the results I get with Portra 400 in my Minolta Riva Panorama, which shoots at box since I can't be bothered to change the DX code on my film.

Kodak - properly known as Kodak Eastman - was founded in America in 1888 and dominated the "Western" world of photography for the next 100 years, constantly in fierce rivalry with the Japanese Fuji. com is a trading name of Jessops Europe Limited, a company registered in England and Wales, company number 08384909. These two images were shot in the small town of Silverton, Oregon where we stayed during the Tulip Festival.I think it’s a great example of the incredible performance of Kodak Ektar 100 when you expose it correctly. However, with Kodak Ektar 100, the grain is barely noticeable throughout the entire image even in the out of focus areas and shadows where grain usually shows up the most. The biggest issue I’ve seen with Ektar is the accuracy of the colors, but it’s not enough to be a significant issue in most cases. Ive also recently (thanks to Negative Feedbacks "cheap film comparison" - check youtube) tried some Kodak ColorPlus 200 (at 100 again) and that stuff is lovely, but a bit more expensive than Agfa Vista. We pulled over at the foot of the bridge that connects the shore points of Sea Isle City and Avalon.

In many occasions I actually like the gritty, grainy look of higher speed or pushed films for night photography. As seen in Figure 1 above, underexposed photographs are likely to shift towards the blues, whereas additional exposure tends to improve an overall colour balance. I’m not going to spell out everything you can’t do with Ektar though, when I can instead tell you what you can.A couple of weeks ago I loaded a roll in my M2 with the intention to try it on my regular daily photography. But my subjects’ skin was shown either super red, yellow, or orange depending on the reflections of the surrounding landscapes.

With so many different films still available and each with their own characteristics, I think understanding where a film doesn’t shine is as important as talking about where it does.As I wasn’t sure yet on the outcome of Ektar, I took a some Portra 400 with me as well, and concluded that it was a good opportunity to compare them both. Original Ektar film (1989 to 1997) started as a colour 35mm and 120 “semi-professional film”, designed to offer ultra-fine grain. Using the current developing costs from my usual source, Ektar is only 58% the cost per frame as Velvia 50. Of course it is a matter of personal preference, but I generally prefer the Portra colours over Ektar. The film offers ultra-fine grains, ultra-vivid colors, and high saturation, and is available in ISO 100 only.