comparison
Kodak Portra 400 vs Kodak Ektar 100
Gentle or vivid?
The same photograph, same exposure, both looks at full strength. See the untouched original.
The difference
Same manufacturer, opposite intent. Portra is built to flatter people: low contrast, restrained saturation, creamy reds. Ektar is built to sell landscapes: high saturation, deep blues, biting microcontrast. Put Ektar on a face and skin goes ruddy; put Portra on a mountain range and it looks washed out. There is very little middle ground between them.
Which to use
Portra 400
Anything with a person in it.
Ektar 100
Landscape, architecture, and colour you want people to notice.
Side by side
| Kodak Portra 400 | Kodak Ektar 100 | |
|---|---|---|
| Type | colour negative | colour negative |
| Maker | Kodak | Kodak |
| Speed | ISO 400 | ISO 100 |
| Produced | 1998–present | 2008–present |
| Renderings here | 16 | 1 |
| Download | .cube | .cube |
Try Kodak Portra 400 on your photo → Try Kodak Ektar 100
A comparison on somebody else's reference photograph only tells you so much. Both of these render on your image in the tool, alongside the other 294.