How to scan Ektar

Edward Horn , Jun 10, 2009; 01:45 p.m.

OK, there have been plenty of questions here about taming Ektar. I struggled with it for quite a while but I've settled on a workflow that works well.
First off, here's a folder of images that I hot with Ektar 100 (in 120 format) and scanned:

http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=879042

To begin with, Ektar is a high-sat film, but it's not a VERY high-sat film like the old Ultra-Color. Skies will always be saturated, but if they're intensely saturated that's your scan, not the film.
Secondly, don't try to balance skin tones by eye. Even using my Lee viewing filters I never quite nailed it. You've got to use a dedicated converter.

Problem is, neither VueScan or Silverfast currently support Ektar. I wrote to Silverfast and the quick answer was "not any time soon".
ColorNeg to the rescue. I had never heard of it until I started trashing about, but I've learned to love it. If you have a background in developing with a color enlarger then it will do something no other scan software does: emulate the CC color filters. And if you don't have that background don't worry, it will still do what you need.
ColorNeg is NOT scanning software. It's a prograam for converting a raw negative file to a positive, and then manipulating it in ways that do not destroy the relationships between the colors (something everything else does).
So first you have to get a neutral raw negative scan, one with absolutely no manipulation of the contents. This isn't as simple as it sounds, but if you have VueScan Pro you can get one pretty easily. In the Output panel, select Raw file, turn raw DNG format OFF and make sure you set "raw output with" to "Scan", otherwise it will muck with the results. My experience is to not use Multi-exposure. That seems to mess up the colors.
OK, now comes ColorNeg. Go down to the bottom and select Ektar. Yup! Silverfast doesn't support it but little cottage industry product does, and does it well. Go figure.
ColorNeg always you to do a bunch of fiddling, but in general I lower the "lightness" setting until all the highlights are tamed then save it.
At this point I convert the result to LAB and use curves to adjust the luminance. This will ensure that the colors stay consistant. Then I bring up ColorPos to do the final color correction (if I need it).
About 20% of the time ColorNeg gets the colors right right off the bat. All I need to do is adjust the liminance. When it doesn't, ColorPos give me the color filter emulation I need. Actually, it's more than emulation. If you have a well calibrated monitor, you can bring out your Lee viewing filters an work exacty as you do in a color darkroom.

OK, that's about it. Once you've done it a few times it's actually pretty smooth. And I have learned to LOVE Ektar.

For those of you who can't be bothered to open the folder.

Responses

1 | 2 Next Last

Roger Smith , Jun 10, 2009; 02:35 p.m.

I'm glad you found a technique that works for you. I would add to your advice about not using multiple exposure- use the Vuescan to lock the exposure for the whole roll. This should save lots of time fiddling with settings in colorneg as you'll have scans that are consistent from frame to frame.

Edward Horn , Jun 10, 2009; 03:24 p.m.

I find I get the best colors with the VueScan RGB exposure locked to 1, but that's not always practical. Not a big difference, though, with the colors at other exposures.

Benny Spinoza , Jun 10, 2009; 03:28 p.m.

Thanks for sharing this information. I can good results using the Portra 160NC negafix curve from SilverFast. But sometimes I've been frustrated with dark grey going blue on me, but I'm starting to think that it was poor processing (done at Walgreens).

Roger Smith , Jun 10, 2009; 06:51 p.m.

Unlike with slide film, I don't see why it would *ever* not be practical to scan negative film at the same exposure. Find the right value that won't block up shadows by scanning the unexposed leader. Set the exposure at that and scan every other roll of that film using the same exposure value.

John Shriver , Jun 10, 2009; 08:10 p.m.

I scanned my roll of Ektar 100 with Nikon Scan 4.0.x, which has no negative profiles. I think it came out quite reasonably "straight".
As for CC filters, you can get them with Digital Light and Color's Picture Window Pro. All the CC filters are in there.
But, color correction really just takes boatloads of practice. Slowly but surely yet get an eye for it. I really wouldn't want to be limited with the simple curve offsets that CC filters provide, I think being able to deal with "crossover" by doing different balances in shadow, midtone, and highlights is a real plus. But it takes discipline.
As for SilverFast (which I presently only own for my Epson V750), I'm not at all surprised that Benny was happy with the Portra 160NC curves. Ektar 100 uses that same dye set, scanning compatible -- a major selling point to Kodak's pro customers.
Also, while I do appreciate SilverFast's film curves, I think that they are not as consistent as they should be. They aren't shot in the same light, with the same grey scale, with equally accurate exposure. So they surely aren't gospel, but can help. The B&W ones can be particularly frustrating.

Benny Spinoza , Jun 10, 2009; 08:39 p.m.

I agree about the Negafix film curves. It is strange that IMHO better results are obtained from 100UC using the 160NC film curve than using the 100UC film curve. Yes...they are not "gospel".

Heinz Anderle , Jun 11, 2009; 02:03 a.m.

Congratulations for these excellent scans! Meanwhile, I have tried virtually all Vuescan (vintage) film profiles (about ~ 1995), but I couldn't obtain any better results than shown at http://photo.net/film-and-processing-forum/00TX24

Edward Horn , Jun 11, 2009; 12:46 p.m.

Heinz,
That's why you gotta use ColorNeg. Eventually Silverfast will support it, but I'm REALLY starting to like ColorNeg.

Benny Spinoza , Jun 11, 2009; 01:26 p.m.

Dang.....the only negative (pun intended) is that it is a photoshop plugin. I'm a photoshop-free photographer!

1 | 2 Next Last

Notify me of Responses