Kodak ColorPlus and ProImage ???

BradS

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
8,120
Location
Soulsbyville, California
Format
35mm
What are these films? How do they compare to Kodak Gold 200 and Max 400 and Fuji Superia X-tra-400 for example? (Other than the obvious film speeds). I cannot find any reference to either of these on the Kodak-Alaris website - but Kodak Gold and Max are both there (along with Ektar, Ektachrome and the Portras).
 
Last edited:

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
23,651
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
Can't say much about the comparison with the particular films you mentioned, but I'm not a fan of ProImage. I found it relatively grainy for its speed, but more importantly, I find its color rendition tends to emphasize yellows/tans a bit. This can be nice for images where you want a sort of a 'warm' touch to it, but I personally prefer something more neutral.
For ProImage 100, there's an old datasheet online here (not hosted by Kodak): https://dreamartemis.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/kodak-proimage-100.pdf
It's dated at 1997 suggesting it's not a particularly new film, but it may (and probably will) have undergone changes over the past decades.
 

Anon Ymous

Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2008
Messages
3,663
Location
Greece
Format
35mm
Kodak ColorPlus 200 is rumored to be based on, or same as Kodacolor VR200. It too has a yellow/tan bias that @koraks mentioned for ProImage 100. It's rather grainy, but not ugly IMHO. It has an old style look and modest saturation.
 

Вormental_old

Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2020
Messages
198
Location
USA
Format
Medium Format
I read somewhere (can't find the source right now, and I do not remember how reputable it seemed) that ProImage is based on Gold 200, but contains two modifications:
  • Its emulsion is optimized for extended non-refrigerated storage in hot climates, at the expense of -1EV, hence ISO 200 -> ISO 100 downgrade.
  • Its color response is optimized for skintones common in Asia.
I am shooting Gold 200 regularly and find it on red/yellow side, much more so than Portra line of films. I've got some ProImage in the fridge, looking forward to shoot and develop some, hopefully this weekend.
 

Arcadia4

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
319
Location
UK
Format
Multi Format
Colorplus was stated by kodak in an interview to be based on kodacolor vr200 essentially an earlier film from the 1980s (82-86) in the same lineage as gold hence the retro tones (its successor being VR-G in 86-7; followed Gold 200 in 88). It was re-introduced in 1990 as a budget color film.

Proimage has an E.I. of 100 (the actual iso isnt stated on the pack possibly the only film sold that way) but is thought to be to be 160 iso. It has a gold print profile so is quite similar to kodak gold 200 inc pricing. It was originally sold in south america and se asia only as suitable for storage without refrigeration. Official European distribution was added only recently.

There has been a number of threads on this topic before so worth a search.
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
20,039
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
Вormental said:
:
  • Its emulsion is optimized for extended non-refrigerated storage in hot climates, at the expense of -1EV, hence ISO 200 -> ISO 100 downgrade.
  • Its color response is optimized for skintones common in Asia.
.
Click to expand...

But presumably in Nepal only the second bullet point is a plus as a selling point

pentaxuser
 

Agulliver

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2015
Messages
3,590
Location
Luton, United Kingdom
Format
Multi Format
As others have stated, Color Plus is Kodacolor VR 200, or something very similar. All Kodak colour negative consumer films in the last 40 years or so have tended towards the red/orange - at least compared to Fuji. I like Color Plus, but then I liked VR and never really liked Gold because I find it too saturated and too red/brown. With Color Plus, a cloudy, dull day looks cloudy and dull. Gold can lift it to look brighter...if you like that sort of thing. Here in the UK Color Plus is a *lot* cheaper than Gold 200. Ultramax 400 is int the same lineage as Gold 200 but has had the reds tweaked a bit to make European skin tones look better. Therefore it's not too far from capturing natural colours. Fuji Superia is probably the finest grained of the lot and doesn't have the sensitivity to red/orange but is probably a little skewed towards greens. Great for landscapes. Great for portraits. Not so great for racing cars, people wearing bright clothes if you want your colours to "pop".

Kodak Pro-Image is interesting....I've shot two rolls at box speed and found that worked but CN film is very tolerant of over-exposure. I found the colours pleasing in the British summer, not subdued but not as overblown as I find Gold. I was shooting the countryside, flowers and horses rather than people. Grain is greater than one would expect of a 100ISO film but not intrusive.
 
OP
OP

BradS

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
8,120
Location
Soulsbyville, California
Format
35mm
Thanks all for responding. I remember using Kodacolor VR but don’t remember whether I liked it or not. I do like Max 400 but I think I’ll continue to use Fuji Superia X-tra 400.
 

foc

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 30, 2010
Messages
2,527
Location
Sligo, Ireland
Format
35mm
I remember in the 1990s, 1 hour minilabs were trying to compete with the large wholesale labs that gave free replacement film.
Each of the big manufacturers decided to offer a cheap alternative to their branded film. In 35mm they offered a 100 box of 24exp film, in the plastic canister only. I remember having to set up a print channel for these films and they were at least 1 or 2 previous generation emulsions.
The ones I can remember are:
Fuji HR200 was the cheap alternative when Super HG & Super G+ were available. I think the present day C200 looks very like HR200
Agfa XR200 was the cheap alternative when XRG & HDC were available.
Sakuracolor SR200 was the cheap alternative when Konica SRG & Super SR were available.
Kodak VR200 was the cheap alternative when VRG & Gold were available.
 

Huss

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
9,058
Location
Hermosa Beach, CA
Format
Multi Format
I like ProImage, it must be good, it has Pro in the name...

But seriously folks, shooting it right now. Here are some recent shots:


















 
OP
OP

BradS

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
8,120
Location
Soulsbyville, California
Format
35mm
Thanks Huss. The greens don’t look too bad here. Did you wrestle with these photos with some computer software thingy?
 

Huss

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
9,058
Location
Hermosa Beach, CA
Format
Multi Format
I used negativelabpro.com for the inversion. Fantastic product. Did not do any wrestling - set white balance off the unexposed orange base, click, convert.
 

Donald Qualls

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
12,332
Location
North Carolina
Format
Multi Format
Wrestling is reserved for those of us who don't want to pay the cost of a good MF body for software that we then have to buy an add-on for.
 

Huss

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
9,058
Location
Hermosa Beach, CA
Format
Multi Format
Donald Qualls said:
Wrestling is reserved for those of us who don't want to pay the cost of a good MF body for software that we then have to buy an add-on for.
Click to expand...

It's worth every penny. I have better things to do w my time than wrestle with conversions. Like take photos.
 
OP
OP

BradS

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
8,120
Location
Soulsbyville, California
Format
35mm
Thanks Huss. The thing that I do not like about Kodak Gold, for example, is the way that greens often come out looking muddy. I do not see muddy greens in the examples you present here...which is nice.
 

Huss

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
9,058
Location
Hermosa Beach, CA
Format
Multi Format
I do find it gets a bit grainy in the shadows if exposed for the bright areas. See below. I actually prefer Fuji C200 which is cheaper, has finer grain and is a stop faster. Also easier to get hold of! But I still also like this film.

ProImage 100:



Fuji C200:

 
OP
OP

BradS

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
8,120
Location
Soulsbyville, California
Format
35mm
Yeah, I very much prefer FujiColor C200 as well. It used to be readily available at local retailers and at a very reasonable price. It doesn't seem like all that long ago either. I don't see it at all anymore - except on line. It's like it just vanished from shelves over night! Now the only color film I find at non-specialty retailers is Fuji Superia X-tra 400...which is a fantastic film so, I'm not really complaining.
 

Huss

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
9,058
Location
Hermosa Beach, CA
Format
Multi Format
Yeah I stock up on C200. At the moment it is 12.99 for 3x36 at Adorama. A 5 pack of ProImage 100 is about $40.
 
OP
OP

BradS

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
8,120
Location
Soulsbyville, California
Format
35mm
$8 per roll...ok...so ProImage 100 is out.

Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…