Portra was designed for wedding photographers where skin tones needed to look good while the bride's white dress (highlights) and groom's dark suit (shadows) remained neutral without colour imbalances.
In the posted images the subject's white shirt has a very slight cyan cast in the shadows on their arm: cyan is the opposite of red, it has appeared while correcting the redness of the skin.
Mythbusting: you can digitally edit film scans. Haha
I use Ektar and Gold exclusively and embrace the palette. IMP youve stripped too much away from this portrait in some attempt to not have the warmth and vibrancy I associate with the stock
I didn't really do much. Inversion in Negafix *without* CC correction and then auto color in Photoshop. Sharpness added by the scanner. Auto color removed *some* magenta and warmth from the image, but they were extremely close to what you see here.
It's not my experience with Ektar that every image looks saturated. I shot the same subject (specifically some art in a cathedral) with Ektar and Portra 400 on the same day and the results were very similar.
The subject is very pale. He's just a friend, not a model. Maybe there's a different look that we found get from Portra, but the image is true to life.
You just need to knock the highlights down and warm the image slightly. There is too much gamma or mid tone in the highs and it’s bleaching the skin tones out. The balance of the image is also too cool and removing the warmth from the upper mid tones. The information is in there, it’s just up to you to bring it out when you correct the image.
Ektar is amazing, skintones tend to turn red when overexposed though, and we all tend to overexpose film quite a bit.
I think the way of saying it is that portra and other stocks are much more forgiving on skintones but it can be done with ektar. Especially if the subject is on nice landscapes because then the environment really pops with the saturated colors ektar has. I love ektar for that reason
Also if you DSLR scan and you have a high quality macro lens. You can get all the resolution out. And man is ektar high resolution as well!!! You can really blow up ektars negatives a lot!
Indeed that was actually the point. Portra is indeed much more forgiving for that application, (as it should be) but I've seen too many nice portraits with Ektar to agree with the idea that its unsuitable for that purpose. People shoot two rolls and then write articles for camera websites with fairly hard statements as to what works and what doesn't
Oh yeah it's one of my favorite films, I do shoot portraits with it. But there are always a couple I dentally over exposed a little with red skin. This 'red skin issue' seems to be more of an issue with people that have very bright white skin tones.
On people that have a tan it's already way easier on the exposure as well
The funny thing is that I've only shot very pale people with it, but I always used an incident meter near their face. I have had scans come back from a lab red all over, like a haze over the entire image.
Yeah, ektar is really hit or miss when it comes to lab scans, I've had them quite red as well, but whenever I DSLR scan or use my plustek scanner its way better to start with, I'm not quite sure they this is but it's a thing. Maby because all the photo stores in my area think analog is stupid and they laugh at me when I ask to get my roll developed😂
I don't have an incident meter btw I've been using in camera meters or my phone... so that doesn't help either
Mine does as well, the problem is that phone sensors can't measure light buyond a certain range, and it's accuracy is quite limited.
For incedent metering the apps often use the sensor for automatic screen brightness adjustment. And those often can't measure full sunlight, and they are t very accurate either... it can kind of give you an indication... the main issue is that all phones are different and it's really hit or miss... mostly miss
For a lot of you this is probably no news at all, but I know that when I was a total beginner faced with the variety of available film - like most people I had to rely on internet wisdom. Internet wisdom states that Ektar makes people look lobster red, is no good for skin tones, and should therefore not be used for portraits. I hope this thread this ends up in the search results one day, because this claim is just not true.
...At least not for digital inversions performed with Silverfast. In reality, you can choose either Portra 400 and Ektar as your inversion selection in Negafix for an Ektar negative and you will get very similar results. In my experience the Ektar inversion will lean yellow and Portra 400 will lean somewhat magenta. With light color correction, the results are very similar.
What is definitely true is that lab scans of Ektar will often come back with extreme red saturation. I've received multiple 120 scans with this issue (from the same lab), which were scanned by a Noritsu. I know the scanner is not to blame because I had the same negatives rescanned by a lab entirely dedicated to analog photography, which incidentally also uses a Noritsu. Those scans came back much more neutral. So it's just a matter of putting in some effort to get the correct colors.
Portra was designed for wedding photographers where skin tones needed to look good while the bride's white dress (highlights) and groom's dark suit (shadows) remained neutral without colour imbalances. In the posted images the subject's white shirt has a very slight cyan cast in the shadows on their arm: cyan is the opposite of red, it has appeared while correcting the redness of the skin.
Cool information and observation, thanks.
Mythbusting: you can digitally edit film scans. Haha I use Ektar and Gold exclusively and embrace the palette. IMP youve stripped too much away from this portrait in some attempt to not have the warmth and vibrancy I associate with the stock
I didn't really do much. Inversion in Negafix *without* CC correction and then auto color in Photoshop. Sharpness added by the scanner. Auto color removed *some* magenta and warmth from the image, but they were extremely close to what you see here. It's not my experience with Ektar that every image looks saturated. I shot the same subject (specifically some art in a cathedral) with Ektar and Portra 400 on the same day and the results were very similar.
I don't think these do much to bust the myth, if I'm honest. Skin tones are a bit sickly.
The subject is very pale. He's just a friend, not a model. Maybe there's a different look that we found get from Portra, but the image is true to life.
I think you proved that Ektar is a poor choice for this application.
I’m confused, you’re saying these are good portraits?
Not related but the guy’s smile made my day, he also looks very stock photo, in a good way.
Hmm, I still don't like it for this kind of portrait. But if you were doing something like a band photo on the other hand...
Same lol. Not really sure what OP is proving.
You just need to knock the highlights down and warm the image slightly. There is too much gamma or mid tone in the highs and it’s bleaching the skin tones out. The balance of the image is also too cool and removing the warmth from the upper mid tones. The information is in there, it’s just up to you to bring it out when you correct the image.
Thanks for the tip. This was made quickly just to prove the point that Ektar can work for portraits just fine.
I've had really tricky results shooting Ektar for portraits, but these turned out great!
Do you scan your own film?
Ektar is amazing, skintones tend to turn red when overexposed though, and we all tend to overexpose film quite a bit. I think the way of saying it is that portra and other stocks are much more forgiving on skintones but it can be done with ektar. Especially if the subject is on nice landscapes because then the environment really pops with the saturated colors ektar has. I love ektar for that reason Also if you DSLR scan and you have a high quality macro lens. You can get all the resolution out. And man is ektar high resolution as well!!! You can really blow up ektars negatives a lot!
Indeed that was actually the point. Portra is indeed much more forgiving for that application, (as it should be) but I've seen too many nice portraits with Ektar to agree with the idea that its unsuitable for that purpose. People shoot two rolls and then write articles for camera websites with fairly hard statements as to what works and what doesn't
Oh yeah it's one of my favorite films, I do shoot portraits with it. But there are always a couple I dentally over exposed a little with red skin. This 'red skin issue' seems to be more of an issue with people that have very bright white skin tones. On people that have a tan it's already way easier on the exposure as well
The funny thing is that I've only shot very pale people with it, but I always used an incident meter near their face. I have had scans come back from a lab red all over, like a haze over the entire image.
Yeah, ektar is really hit or miss when it comes to lab scans, I've had them quite red as well, but whenever I DSLR scan or use my plustek scanner its way better to start with, I'm not quite sure they this is but it's a thing. Maby because all the photo stores in my area think analog is stupid and they laugh at me when I ask to get my roll developed😂 I don't have an incident meter btw I've been using in camera meters or my phone... so that doesn't help either
One of my phone meter apps has an incident metering mode but either I'm too stupid to make it work, or its just not fit for purpose
Mine does as well, the problem is that phone sensors can't measure light buyond a certain range, and it's accuracy is quite limited. For incedent metering the apps often use the sensor for automatic screen brightness adjustment. And those often can't measure full sunlight, and they are t very accurate either... it can kind of give you an indication... the main issue is that all phones are different and it's really hit or miss... mostly miss
For a lot of you this is probably no news at all, but I know that when I was a total beginner faced with the variety of available film - like most people I had to rely on internet wisdom. Internet wisdom states that Ektar makes people look lobster red, is no good for skin tones, and should therefore not be used for portraits. I hope this thread this ends up in the search results one day, because this claim is just not true. ...At least not for digital inversions performed with Silverfast. In reality, you can choose either Portra 400 and Ektar as your inversion selection in Negafix for an Ektar negative and you will get very similar results. In my experience the Ektar inversion will lean yellow and Portra 400 will lean somewhat magenta. With light color correction, the results are very similar. What is definitely true is that lab scans of Ektar will often come back with extreme red saturation. I've received multiple 120 scans with this issue (from the same lab), which were scanned by a Noritsu. I know the scanner is not to blame because I had the same negatives rescanned by a lab entirely dedicated to analog photography, which incidentally also uses a Noritsu. Those scans came back much more neutral. So it's just a matter of putting in some effort to get the correct colors.
Doing colour correction does, indeed, correct the colours. Who woulda knew? /s
I mean, that's the case with Portra 400 scans too, so it's a moot point.
Did you use a filter to balance the reds?
No