Recent content by real_liiva

NLP can produce this result with tint cranked all the way to -40, but the image still looks "off" in some way, just looks like i've never seen ultramax look like before. Also Silverfast does fine with minimal corrections with all other ultramax negatives i have.

So recently i decided to use some pretty old and used cinestill c41 developer to develop a few rolls (adox color mission and ultramax). Loaded both rolls into one tank and developed them both at the same time. The color mission came out practically perfect, maybe a hair thin only but the scans...

They just updated the product image and it no longer shows a film with a green emulsion. It is almost certainly Kodak disposable/Lomo 800 film.

Kodak markets Ektar 100 as the finest grained color negative film in the world, but is that really true even when taking into account films not made for "mere mortals"? Like not even talking about technical films like duplication/print films or other analog movie workflow technical films but...

Yeah silver AH layer gets removed by any bleach-fix process including both C41 and ECN2. the presence or absence of it can only really be seen if you bleach bypass the film and the base looks really dark, almost like heavily fogged film.

It's technically not a motion picture stock and never was due to the lack of remjet. It's just lawyer speak saying that they made the film without remjet, rather than removing the remjet after manufacture like cinestill did in the early days. (now all of cinestills films are manufactured...

400D is merely vision3 250D manufactured without remjet, it's far from a custom emulsion or film design.

Now that i look at the product page, if the film in the promotional can is the actual film, seems to have an awfully familiar yellow-green emulsion. Would InovisCoat classify as a "major manufacturer"? Can't imagine them really making anything that could be classified as a "professional film"...

Either Gold/MAX 800 aka disposable camera film and lomo800, or the manufactured without remjet variant of 500t that cinestill seems to be getting direct from kodak at this point (technically a purpose made film that isnt a cine film, but 500t derived). MAX800 doesn't push that well so might...

I've always been curious as to why Germany needed their own national Gold derivative. It's not like German skin tines are different from the rest of europe or something. I always assumed it was the same Gold just named differently but if it's really a derivative made specifically for the German...

How much funding would it be? And how diverse of a film can kodak easily resurrect? Like i know their IR stocks are impossible due to their IR based quality control these days but could some small company with some seed capital + crowdfunding get kodak to resurrect something like 400 iso...

So the general consensus i've heard on lomo's kodak made stocks (color negative 100, 400, 800) is that 100 and 400 are Kodacolor VR derived stocks and 800 is max 800 identical to what's in disposables. Ive also heard some say that Lomo 100 is ProImage 100 and some others that say Lomo 800 isņt...

I have some c-5168 ferricyanide bleach, I was able to get color also with blix though. I did notice that the color of the base fog was different. With blix the base fog was a greyish purple, with ferricyanide bleach and bw fixer the base fog was almost orange like an orange mask. In scans this...

Back in the summer i managed to get "decent" images off of orwo NC19 negative film by developing in room temp c41, recently got my hands on some UT21 and tried the same thing. Gave it as much light as i could (probably around EI 6) and developed in 24 C C41 for 8 minutes. Got color images...

Yeah, the cast in those samples can be corrected out relatively easily. I understand the film is probably even worse suited for darkroom printing than Phoenix due to this but it's certainly scannable. TBH going forward in the future i would rather have a color film with a cast but a "usable"...