Are they not making The films that are Rollei retro 80s? Or Copex films anymore?
Yes, it is, definitely.
Rollei Superpan 200, Rollei Retro 400s, Rollei Infrared 400 (as well as meanwhile JCH Street Pan and two of the Silberra films) are all Agfa Aviphot Pan 200 film.
You see that immediately if you test them: Evaluating the characteristic curve; evaluating the spectral sensitivity; and doing resolution, sharpness and fineness of grain tests. I've done all that numerous times in my photo test lab.
Photo chemistry manufacturer SPUR has done the same, and has also confirmed it.
Many other very experienced photographers have done that, too, and have come to the same result.
And: Many years ago that was also been confirmed by the Maco CEO of that time.
And: Agfa Aviphot Pan 200 is the only possible film in production at Agfa in Belgium for these films, as the former Aviphot Pan 400 was discontinued long ago (last coating run of that film was in 2008).
Best regards,
Henning
Well if you are a U.S user of course then there is little or no premium to be paid That only becomes the case when the only U.K. stockist I can find that sells it is Analogue Wonderland at £10
If Harman had a hand in its production or has been responsible for it almost completely then it raises the question that has been mentioned by others, namely: If this film has had a U.K. film maker's hand in its production what explains the massive difference in the 2 prices - the U.S, being $6.99 and in the U.K. the equivalent of almost $12
If on the other hand Harman had no hand in it then what costs, in sending it to the U.K., account for nearly $5?
pentaxuser
It was engineers at Sony who came up with the red book standard, and since Sony was bankrolling the whole thing, we were stuck with it.
Lifeless midfi sound that distorted high frequencies and lacked inner detail, you bet.
And Fuji didn't say it took 4 years to design it either.
Was Rollei honest? Serious question… I really don’t know if they divulged their source and data sheets. After experience with Bergger I just don’t ask questions or complain if it work’s acceptable for me.
I don't recall Rollei issuing a press release saying that their film was a new film four years in the making, totally unique and unavailable from any source in any other packaging, and then coming on Photrio and repeating the same claims. If Rollei did, then I would hold it in the same low esteem I hold the CatLABS guy.
And Fuji didn't say it took 4 years to design it either.
YepAnd does any of this matter as long as you like the final results?
And does any of this matter as long as you like the final results?
If it doesn't matter to you, then I am pretty sure it won't matter to anyone.And does any of this matter as long as you like the final results? That’s all I care about. When I sell my pics no-one is going to look at them and say ‘ya know I was about to buy this but then you told me you used fuji 200 when actually it really is Kodak 200, so I’m out”And does any of this matter as long as you like the final results?
Pretending? What an interesting choice of words. It sounds so child-like and innocent. One can envision a young boy wearing short pants running through a field of wildflowers holding a toy airplane above his head pretending he is flying. Soft focus. Slow motion. Sentimental music.Well they didn’t say anything because most people didn't notice. They just bought what they thought was Fuji 200.
what is worse? Catlabs pretending they have an all new film? Or Fuji changing what is inside the box while acting like it is business as usual?
I wonder if the film came with the DX code for Kodak or Fuji, on the edge printing beisde the frame numbers. that is what selects the printer channel in the bar code era.On the colour film front, I wonder if the commercial labs were alerted by Fuji with a memo: "use the Kodak Gold channel on your minilab scanner"?
4 years in the making sounds about right, considering that COVID shut almost everything down for around half of that time. It definitely interrupted my life, basically all the plans I had for those years went up like smoke, but that's OK. I'm still here. There was a time when any of us or all of us could have been easily taken out by that bug.
Surely some explanation is in order to all members participating in the thread.
The title of the thread has now been changed back and appears in a Google search of the film's name. Surely some explanation is in order to all members participating in the thread.
There was an incorrect permission setting for one of the groups that gave extended time for thread edits by owner. It's been corrected now. Thanks for the heads up!
Curiosity has gotten me...what was the titled changed to, before it was changed back? May we know?
For those who may need it:
Translation: CatLABS (the "owner" in site software parlance) made the change, and they shouldn't have been able to. And in the future, they and others posting in this sub-forum won't be able to either.
The site software uses "owner" to refer to the member who starts a thread.
Thanks Sean!
As best as I can remember "Photrio talking to themselves".
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?