Conversations

Photos

Files

All groups

About

<< Previous Thread ektachrome vs fujichrome in longevity / stability Next Thread >>

Subject: ektachrome vs fujichrome in longevity / stability
Date: 2011-12-13 12:49:41
From: borisstarosta

I posted this to the "film3d" group, but then realized this group might be the better one to ask:

Ken Rockwell reviewed some Ektachrome and made the aside statement that Fuji
films are more stable. He repeats this in his overview on films entitled "Film and Printing:"

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/film.htm

Obviously this is of great interest to some of us stereo
shooters, as the piece of film itself is the collectible item, and we'd like it to last as long as possible.

Does anyone on this list have an opinion or knowledge about this?

I was thinking of buying some Ektachrome 100G for shooting nudes, but have
previously always used Fuji Astia / Sensia films.

WHat are your favorite slide films for skin tones under daylight or flash
illumination?

thanks,

Boris

Subject: Re: ektachrome vs fujichrome in longevity / stability
Date: 2011-12-13 13:30:55
From: John Thurston

borisstarosta wrote:

> I posted this to the "film3d" group, but then realized
> this group might be the better one to ask:
>
> Ken Rockwell reviewed some Ektachrome and made the aside
> statement that Fuji films are more stable. He repeats
> this in his overview on films entitled "Film and
> Printing:"
>
> http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/film.htm

Well, much of what Ken says seems to have little research to
back it up. 'I like the way Velvia images look. I know how
to use it. My 1989 Velvia images still look fine to me.
Don't bother with that Kodak stuff.' I _like_ reading Ken's
stuff, but citing it as if it were an objective reference is
a mistake.

>
> Obviously this is of great interest to some of us stereo
> shooters, as the piece of film itself is the collectible
> item, and we'd like it to last as long as possible.
>
> Does anyone on this list have an opinion or knowledge
> about this?

I'd be looking at the manufacturers' statements of storage
suggestions and longevity, as well as independent research
sources like Wilhelm Imaging.

I try not to worry too much about it. I'll be disappointed
if I open my shoebox and discover my slides have been eaten
by mice (or covered in fungus), but it isn't my livelihood
at stake.
--
John Thurston
Juneau Alaska
http://stereo.thurstons.us

Subject: Re: ektachrome vs fujichrome in longevity / stability
Date: 2011-12-13 17:21:07
From: timo_puhakka

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "borisstarosta" wrote:

>
> I posted this to the "film3d" group, but then realized this group might be the better one to ask:
>
> Ken Rockwell reviewed some Ektachrome and made the aside statement that Fuji
> films are more stable. He repeats this in his overview on films entitled "Film and Printing:"

I had heard this a long time ago, and have rarely used Ektachrome because of this rumour.

That being said, I think that my overall view is that the stability of modern E6 films has improved greatly since the 50s. I now find myself buying Elitechrome (for 35mm) because of the growing price difference with Fuji films. For 120 I still stick to Provia 100f and 400x. Very natural colour reproduction under most conditions.

I think that Sensia and Elitechrome are a better choice for portraits.

Subject: Re: ektachrome vs fujichrome in longevity / stability
Date: 2011-12-13 17:40:02
From: JR

The choice of film that is most appropriate is certainly affected by the subject matter. For example, the motion picture industry often uses color impression to differentiate between masculinity and femininity. Male stars are often lit with a "straw" or other warm filter over the key light, and female with "rose" or other more pink filters.

JR
stereoscope3d@gmail.com

On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 3:21 PM, timo_puhakka <timopuhakka@rogers.com> wrote:

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "borisstarosta" wrote:
>
> I posted this to the "film3d" group, but then realized this group might be the better one to ask:
>
> Ken Rockwell reviewed some Ektachrome and made the aside statement that Fuji
> films are more stable. He repeats this in his overview on films entitled "Film and Printing:"

I had heard this a long time ago, and have rarely used Ektachrome because of this rumour.

That being said, I think that my overall view is that the stability of modern E6 films has improved greatly since the 50s. I now find myself buying Elitechrome (for 35mm) because of the growing price difference with Fuji films. For 120 I still stick to Provia 100f and 400x. Very natural colour reproduction under most conditions.

I think that Sensia and Elitechrome are a better choice for portraits.

--

Subject: Re: ektachrome vs fujichrome in longevity / stability
Date: 2011-12-14 10:16:50
From: bob_karambelas

Early E-6 films has some longevity problems, and that included not just Ektachrome but all the others. But Ektachrome got the bad name because it was the most common E6 film. My understanding is that most E6 films had more or less caught up to Kodachrome on longevity by the 1990's (perhaps not equal, but "close enough").

Anyway, I just scanned some Ektachromes from 1971, and they seem very good... dust and scratches were a bigger problem than fading. OTOH, I have some old Agfachromes that haven't fared as well.

Nowadays, I doubt there's much to choose between Kodak and Fuji. As a matter of fact, I've started using more Kodak, just for a slightly different color balance.

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "borisstarosta" wrote:

Subject: Re: ektachrome vs fujichrome in longevity / stability
Date: 2011-12-14 10:24:20
From: bob_karambelas

BTW... Astia, Astia, Astia. Incredible film (although I still haven't used the latest batches that gave you problems)

Elite Chrome seems the best bet in 35mm. I've read that Elite Chrome runs a little warmer than Ektachrome 100G, which seems plausible if it's a consumer film.

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "borisstarosta" wrote:

> WHat are your favorite slide films for skin tones under daylight or flash
> illumination?
>
> thanks,
>
> Boris
>

Subject: Re: ektachrome vs fujichrome in longevity / stability
Date: 2011-12-14 13:00:25
From: Boris Starosta

great replies, thank you all for the perspective.

BTW, the trouble bob mentions is that I recently shot some older Astia and some newer Astia 100F on a subject, pretty much at the same time, lighting and all well matched, same subject, etc. (nude in nature), and found that the older Astia had a much more pleasant color balance - more response to the blue in shadows (lit by the sky), more response to all the colors in the scene, maybe more saturation/contrast? The 100F exposures were relatively muted, dull, and all tended too much towards green. The whole exposure looked rather green.

Maybe it is because the Astia 100F is "green" film? (i.e. brand new, not yet ripe) It has an expiration date of 7/2013.

cheers,

Boris

On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 11:24 AM, bob_karambelas <bob_karambelas@yahoo.com> wrote:

Subject: Re: ektachrome vs fujichrome in longevity / stability
Date: 2011-12-14 13:22:48
From: Bill G

Boris, if I had to guess, the differences you are seeing might be in the processing, not
the film...
Also, if this was sun lit.... the most likely scenario is the color temp of the light...
did you have a color meter with you and get the same readings on each shoot?
Our eyes are not sensitive to color temp variations of a few thousand degrees Kelvin, as
our brain adjusts for this. Yet film is very sensitive to color temp of light...
Not all full sun lit days have the same color temp, as often it depends on the color the
sky, which varies based on the time of year, humidity in air, etc.
Often when I bring out my color meter, I try to guess the color temp before seeing the
meter readings, and its rare I am within 1k deg. K.
At times, I have been as much as 4k degrees off vs. what the meter reads. I am using a
Gossen Pro 3F

Bill

On 12/14/2011 10:59 AM, Boris Starosta wrote:
>
> great replies, thank you all for the perspective.
>
>
> BTW, the trouble bob mentions is that I recently shot some older Astia and some newer
> Astia 100F on a subject, pretty much at the same time, lighting and all well matched,
> same subject, etc. (nude in nature), and found that the older Astia had a much more
> pleasant color balance - more response to the blue in shadows (lit by the sky), more
> response to all the colors in the scene, maybe more saturation/contrast? The 100F
> exposures were relatively muted, dull, and all tended too much towards green. The whole
> exposure looked rather green.
>
> Maybe it is because the Astia 100F is "green" film? (i.e. brand new, not yet ripe) It
> has an expiration date of 7/2013.
>
> cheers,
>
> Boris
>
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 11:24 AM, bob_karambelas <bob_karambelas@yahoo.com
> bob_karambelas@yahoo.com>> wrote:
>
>
>

Subject: Re: ektachrome vs fujichrome in longevity / stability
Date: 2011-12-14 13:46:15
From: John Rowe

Additionally (back in pre digital) filtration is often needed in specific
lighting situations.
For example, years ago I used to photograph running shots of boats / yachts
with 120 Transparency usually EPN or Provia 100. In ALL CASES in order
to render correct color I used an 81B filter. Why? Bright sunny day Blue or
cyan sky
over dark blue ocean would color a white boat BLUE /CYAN - the 81B cleaned
that up.

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill G
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2011 2:22 PM
To: MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [MF3D-group] Re: ektachrome vs fujichrome in longevity /
stability

Boris, if I had to guess, the differences you are seeing might be in the
processing, not
the film...
Also, if this was sun lit.... the most likely scenario is the color temp of
the light...
did you have a color meter with you and get the same readings on each shoot?
Our eyes are not sensitive to color temp variations of a few thousand
degrees Kelvin, as
our brain adjusts for this. Yet film is very sensitive to color temp of
light...
Not all full sun lit days have the same color temp, as often it depends on
the color the
sky, which varies based on the time of year, humidity in air, etc.
Often when I bring out my color meter, I try to guess the color temp before
seeing the
meter readings, and its rare I am within 1k deg. K.
At times, I have been as much as 4k degrees off vs. what the meter reads. I
am using a
Gossen Pro 3F

Bill

On 12/14/2011 10:59 AM, Boris Starosta wrote:
>
> great replies, thank you all for the perspective.
>
>
> BTW, the trouble bob mentions is that I recently shot some older Astia and
> some newer
> Astia 100F on a subject, pretty much at the same time, lighting and all
> well matched,
> same subject, etc. (nude in nature), and found that the older Astia had a
> much more
> pleasant color balance - more response to the blue in shadows (lit by the
> sky), more
> response to all the colors in the scene, maybe more saturation/contrast?
> The 100F
> exposures were relatively muted, dull, and all tended too much towards
> green. The whole
> exposure looked rather green.
>
> Maybe it is because the Astia 100F is "green" film? (i.e. brand new, not
> yet ripe) It
> has an expiration date of 7/2013.
>
> cheers,
>
> Boris
>
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 11:24 AM, bob_karambelas <bob_karambelas@yahoo.com
> bob_karambelas@yahoo.com>> wrote:
>
>
>

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

Subject: Re: ektachrome vs fujichrome in longevity / stability
Date: 2011-12-14 15:07:09
From: dvint@dvint.com

My guess would be the age of the film. I don't remember is Astia counted
as a Pro film? The description that I have heard is that Pro films are
aged and are at the near perfect point for consistent images. amatuer
films are exactly the same formula, but they are put on the shelf
immediatly, with the intention, that they will probably sit there for some
time before someone purchases it, and then maybe more time before it is
actually used. Hence the reason for refirgerating pro films to keep them
at their peak.

..dan

> great replies, thank you all for the perspective.
>
> BTW, the trouble bob mentions is that I recently shot some older Astia and
> some newer Astia 100F on a subject, pretty much at the same time, lighting
> and all well matched, same subject, etc. (nude in nature), and found that
> the older Astia had a much more pleasant color balance - more response to
> the blue in shadows (lit by the sky), more response to all the colors in
> the scene, maybe more saturation/contrast? The 100F exposures were
> relatively muted, dull, and all tended too much towards green. The whole
> exposure looked rather green.
>
> Maybe it is because the Astia 100F is "green" film? (i.e. brand new, not
> yet ripe) It has an expiration date of 7/2013.
>
> cheers,
>
> Boris
>
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 11:24 AM, bob_karambelas
> <bob_karambelas@yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>