Many film photographers were crestfallen when — after declining sales resulting from the rise of digital — Kodak discontinued the last remaining variety of its Ektachrome color reversal film back in 2013, leaving Fujifilm as the only major producer of color reversal films. (I have always preferred the term “reversal film,” but many call it transparency film or slide film.) Some predicted that reversal films would eventually go away, labs that process E-6 (a chemical process identifier for Ektachrome and all other modern reversal films) would stop doing so, the very few remaining labs that specialize in E-6 would close, and that would be that.
Alas, that wasn’t the case, at least not for now. Film slowly began to rebound to a seemingly sustainable level; enough so, apparently, that Kodak made waves when it announced in late 2017 that the Ektachrome production line was to be restarted. Ektachrome E100 finally began reaching store shelves in 135 format in October 2018, followed by 120 and sheet formats, which began to trickle to stores just a few months before the COVID-19 pandemic hit.
New (or at least reintroduced) film stocks are rare these days, and are definitely cause for celebration. Retailers were heralding the imminent return of Ektachrome E100, encouraging preorders, and often providing discounts as incentives as the various formats started to return.
I bought some Ektachrome in 135 format in mid-2019, and essentially thought I was starting this review at that point. But then in mid-December 2019, I preordered two boxes of Ektachrome E100 in 120 format. I was excited that I could probably justify shooting some of the expired Ektachrome that’s been sitting in my fridge. And I also picked-up a couple of boxes of 4×5 sheets as well, and decided to hold-off on this review until I’d gotten through some or all of them.
As it turned out, Kodak had some difficulty in meeting demand at first, according to at least three retailers I spoke with in early 2020. Indeed, it wasn’t until mid-February 2020 that I finally got my boxes of the 120 film. And regrettably, it was longer still before I had a chance to shoot enough of it to justify breaking-out one of the E-6 processing kits that I’d long ago acquired in anticipation.
The pandemic put a serious damper on my creativity, photographically and otherwise. I didn’t venture out much, especially in the early days when so much was unknown, and fears ran high. But as infection numbers spiraled out of control, I began to wonder just how long I would be stuck at home. Ektachrome, with its beautiful color rendering, is tailor-made for landscapes or flowers or car shows or sunrises or whatever other moments demand vibrant color — and the world felt rather gray for the majority of 2020.
Now, a long while after I’d started drafting this review, I’ve finally had a chance to break more Ektachrome out of the film fridge and shoot enough of it to justify mixing an E-6 kit, and getting a few rolls done and scanned. At this point, I’ve not cracked-open the 4×5, however.
What I Like
My first time shooting and self-processing Ektachrome was a whopping four decades ago. Things have changed since my days trying to temper a water bath for the chemistry in the family bath tub; these days, I use an immersion circulator — sometime erroneously referred to as a “sous vide machine” — to temper the water bath in which my color chemistry sits while processing rolls.
In any case, what I liked about Ektachrome way back in the day I find that I still like today:
- Stunningly Beautiful Color
I’ll confess that this perception is likely little more than the fact that you can look at a finished piece of reversal film and see the image in its finished form, whereas a color negative is a bit enigmatic. And in this age of hybrid processes resulting ultimately in a digital image, things like color palettes, color saturation, contrast, etc. can always be easily tweaked in Photoshop or Lightroom (not to mention outright faked), so this matters much less than it once did. But nevertheless, Ektachrome provides rich, perfectly saturated, authentic color reproduction that’s a joy to look at. In fact, it brings me joy simply to sleeve my medium format Ektachrome in PrintFile sheets, lay it on a light table, and admire the vibrant results. The main direct competitor to Ektachrome, Fuji’s Provia, is also quite nice, but I strongly believe Ektachrome provides superior color reproduction. - Sits Flat
After running several different reversal films in E-6 chemistry lately, I have a particular appreciation for Ektachrome’s behavior after drying. I’ve found that it’s relatively flat when dry, with no longitudinal curl whatsoever for me. Laterally, there’s a very slight curl, but the strips of film load and sits quite well in my Epson V800 scanner’s film holders. Contrast that to Fuji’s Provia, which has a dramatic lateral curl toward the emulsion side, making scanning a painful chore; the film has to be taped down to even stay in the film holder. I can say this with confidence: I’ll never buy Provia again for that reason alone. In short, I love how cooperative Ektachrome is to my workflow. - Consistently High Quality
One thing I have to say for Kodak: The quality of the product is consistently outstanding. I’ve never experienced any sort of flaws in Ektachrome (or any other Kodak film) — no evidence of bubbles or coating glitches or anything else in the emulsion — and when it comes to medium format, I don’t think I’m exaggerating to say that Kodak’s backing papers for their 120 films (including Ektachrome) are unparalleled. - Fine Grain
While no actual silver halide “grains” are left after processing a color film, image formation nevertheless begins with them, and Ektachrome is beautifully fine grained. Even in 135, as you’ll see in the examples below, the image sharpness and reproduction are incredible.
What I Don’t Like (Ektachrome-Specific)
The positives outweigh the negatives with Ektachrome (which is a horrible pun, I realize after writing that). In fact, there’s really just one thing I dislike about Ektachrome very specifically:
- High Cost
All film is getting increasingly expensive, and seemingly the pandemic only made the pre-existing conditions worse. Kodak, in particular, however, seems to have raised prices more rapidly and to higher overall levels than its competitors; it’s been the subject of blog posts, forum conversations and podcasts throughout the film photography community for awhile now, so no need to rehash that here. To shoot Ektachrome, you really have to want to. For me, it’ll remain a choice that I’ll continue to justify, but it’s getting harder and harder to do so.
What I Don’t Like (Other)
It’s difficult to hold any of the following against Ektachrome itself, as these pertain to color reversal films more broadly. I’d be remiss, however, if I didn’t mention them:
- Poor Exposure Latitude
Ektachrome, like other color reversal films, has comparatively poor exposure latitude. When I first wrote about Ektachrome, I referred to Kodak Alaris saying that the latitude of the film is about half a stop. Others have repeated the same number, but as I write this review, I can’t recover the original Kodak Alaris source for that information. But regardless of what the specific number may or may not be, the key point here is that it’s especially important to accurately meter your subject or scene when shooting color reversal films (including Ektachrome) — more so than with other films, color or black and white — and know that scenes with dramatic variations in highlights and shadows are unlikely to reproduce optimally. - Lab Processing Availability
Not every film lab processes E-6, so unless you process Ektachrome yourself at home, you may have to resort to mail order labs to get your film done — which in many areas, may well apply to getting any film processed. - Processing is More Costly
Once you’ve found a lab that’ll process your Ektachrome, you’ll no doubt discover that it’s generally a bit more expensive than C-41 (color negative) processing. In large part, it’s due to the dramatically lower volumes of E-6 processing done by most labs, but if home chemistry kits are any indication, it’s likely a chemical cost factor as well, which brings us to… - Chemistry Kits are More Costly
If you’re a process-at-home photographer, E-6 kits are readily available from the usual mail order sources, including Freestyle, Ultrafine, and many others. Much to my surprise, even my preferred local brick-and-mortar supplier (Denver Pro Photo) has, in 2021, begun to stock the kits from CineStill. These kits are, however, incrementally more expensive than C-41 kits, primarily due to the extra steps; most home C-41 kits are two-step processes (developer and blix), while E-6 are three-step (first developer, color developer, and blix). Like the C-41 kits, however, you can easily run a dozen or more rolls through, proportionally extending the first developer processing times, with little or no degradation in the quality of the result (provided you do so over a relatively short overall timeframe). This makes it possible to amortize that slightly higher cost over several rolls.
The Proof
While Ektachrome shines with vibrantly colored subject matter (see the car show shots below), even with “normal” color scenes (like the railroad rolling stock ones below), the film shines. Colors are true-to-life, and nicely saturated without being overdone.
Some of the shots below are lab processed, while others were done in my own darkroom. In both cases, they were scanned on my Epson V800, using only the scanner’s native auto-exposure settings. No color adjustments or other enhancements were applied, either during or after scanning.
I’m not sure that these digital representations really do the film justice. When I put any of the originals on my light table, they look far better than any of these. Perhaps that’s due to Ektachrome’s roots lying in projection of the images as slides, perhaps it’s subjective reactions. Either way, it’s an incredible film.
Here are some examples of Ektachrome E100, both from 135 and 120 films:
The Verdict
When I shot my first roll of new production E100 with my Minolta XG 1, I was genuinely impressed with the color rendering and the incredibly fine grain. Since then, having shot it in both 135 and 120, and in multiple cameras, I can say that — simply put — it’s a beautiful film that produces beautiful images when properly composed, metered and shot. And for me, it’s worth the extra cost of the film, and the processing. I’m confident that Kodak Ektachrome E100 will remain part of my film repertoire for however long Kodak opts to continue making it.
