KodakEktar 100

Kodak Ektar 100 is an ISO 100 color negative film for C-41 processing, which Kodak sells as the finest-grained color negative film available, with “high saturation and ultra-vivid color” [1]. It is not a slide film, but The Darkroom calls it “the closest color negative alternative to slide film” [5]. Since January 2026, Eastman Kodak sells it directly under the same name, while Kodak Alaris still lists it [2] [3] [4].

Look and color

• High saturation, but not garish, for most reviews. Kodak’s datasheet promises “ultra-vivid color” [1]. Analog.cafe finds its colors “neither overbearing nor unnatural” [6], and Casual Photophile says it avoids “rendering colors in an overzealous way” [7]. Others find it “ultra-saturated. No color is left behind” [8].
• Next to Velvia. “Ektar is not far behind” Velvia 50 for saturation, according to Blue Moon Camera [12]; “Velvia still beats the pants off Ektar” for Lewis Collard [9]. Emulsive finds Ektar’s colors “pleasingly soft” next to slide film [10].
• Blues and greens “are especially vivid” [5]; one reviewer singles out its “blue tones, and blue-greens” in sea and sky [11].
• Reds are rendered “more strongly” [5] and “can really pop” in daylight [11].
• Skin is the weak point. Nearly every review says it: the film “can make faces look redder than usual” [6]; it gives “warmer or slightly red-shifted skin” [5]; lighter skin “may come away a bit pink” [7] or does not “look particularly normal” [8]; skin can look “too saturated or ruddy” [12]; “I’ve gone pink!” [9]. The dissenting view: James Cater “completely disagree[s]” and overexposes skin by a third of a stop [13].
• Casts that move with exposure. Analog.cafe finds that lab scans “lean towards warmer tones in the highlights” and corrects Ektar by bringing down “the blue in the shadows” and cutting “some of the red in the highlights” [6]. Underexposure gives “a blue cast”, overexposure “more red tones in the lighter areas” [7]. Only Emulsive describes a “slight yellow-green cast” [10].

Tonality

• Curve. On the datasheet, the toe runs from about 4.5 to 3 stops below middle gray. The green curve’s slope is about 0.57, then eases to about 0.49 from about 3 stops above middle gray: highlights compress slightly (our reading of the graph) [1]. That slope is no steeper than Portra 400’s [15]. The punch reviews describe probably comes from saturation, printing and scanning rather than from the negative’s curve (our interpretation).
• Contrast: strong for most, natural for one. Reviews find “strong contrast” [5] [6], “more contrasty than Portra” with blacks that “may be too black for some shooters” [7]. Analog.cafe sees “the most contrast and saturation near the shadows” [6]. Lewis Collard, on the contrary, finds “very natural-looking contrast” and “a lot of shadow detail (far too much for my tastes)” [9].
• Latitude: the sources disagree.
  • Narrow: “medium to low exposure latitude”, and it “does not handle overexposure nearly as gracefully as films like Portra 160” [5].
  • Medium: Analog.cafe reads about 9 stops from the curve and expects it to “handle overexposure really well”, but advises overexposing “by one stop (but no more than that)” [6].
  • Wide: “the exposure latitude is great” [11]; “over 10 stops of dynamic range” [10].
• Underexposure is where they agree. “I do not recommend underexposing it” [6]; underexposure brings “dense shadows and overly strong contrast” [5] and “lackluster punch and diminished color saturation” [7]. Casual Photophile still gets usable frames at two stops under, with a blue cast [7], and Lewis Collard found that two stops under “hasn’t ruined the shot” [9].
• Long exposures: no correction from 1/10,000 s to 1 s [1].

Grain and sharpness

Kodak rates grain with the Print Grain Index (PGI), a perceptual scale for prints viewed at 14 inches. 25 is the approximate visibility threshold, and 4 units make one just-noticeable difference [1].

• Ektar stays under the threshold for a 4×6 print from 35 mm, and for prints up to 8×10 from 120. From 35 mm, the index reaches 38 at 8×10 and 66 at 16×20. From 4×5 and 8×10 sheets, it stays under 25 up to 16×20 [1].
• Reviews agree: “almost no visible grain when scanned, even at 40MP” [6]; “virtually no grain whatsoever” in 35 mm [7]; grain “just visible enough to be pleasant at any sensible enlargement” [9].
• Sharpness: Kodak publishes modulation transfer curves but no resolving power figure [1].

Spectral sensitivity

The three layers are narrow and well separated. The blue-sensitive layer stays on a plateau from about 405 to 475 nm and is drawn only to 495 nm; the green-sensitive layer peaks near 546 nm and drops steeply between 575 and 590 nm; the red-sensitive layer is drawn only from 555 nm and peaks near 652 nm, so the blue and red curves do not overlap [1]. Little overlap means cleaner color separation, which fits the film’s saturation (our interpretation). The Grain Archive color style is tuned from the datasheet and the reviews above; it is not computed from these curves.

Names, status and history

• The first Ektar (1989). Kodak first used the Ektar name for a semi-professional color negative line introduced in 1989, in speeds from 25 to 1000; it was discontinued in the 1990s and replaced by Royal Gold [14].
• Ektar 100 (2008). The current film was introduced in September 2008, first in 35 mm, then in 120, then in 4×5 and 8×10 sheets in 2010 [14]. The datasheet cites “Kodak Vision film technology” among its components [1].
• Eastman Kodak distribution (January 2026). In January 2026, Eastman Kodak started selling Ektar and Tri-X directly in the United States and Canada, in 135 and 120, in “retro-inspired packaging” [4]. Ektar kept its name: Kodak’s page lists “Kodak Ektar 100” in 135-36, 120 and 4×5 sheets [2].
• Still sold by Kodak Alaris. On September 29, 2026, Kodak Alaris still listed Kodak Professional Ektar 100 in 135, 120 and sheet sizes including 4×5 and 8×10 [3]. Its January 2025 datasheet remains the current technical reference [1].