Kodak Gold 200 : first roll ;-)

[Theo Sulphate]

There are numerous conversions happening here: the scan of the negative, the calibration of the OP's monitor, the calibration of the monitors of everyone else.

To me the colors look fine. Perhaps they're not entirely neutral, but they have a tonal quality that I find pleasing.

 

[1kgcoffee]

For those saying that the colors are off in the posted images: Yes this is true but to my eyes it is pleasing. Gives the images almost a dreamy look. Home developing the film will inevitably lead to such results. I think we have a certain amount of artistic interpretation with home done film where this is the end goal. A sort of perfection that arises the from the flaws. The Japanese call this aesthetic Wabi Sabi.

I do not find perfect colour balance an easily attainable or worthy goal with film. Close and recognizable is more than good.

 

[miha]

For those saying that the colors are off in the posted images: Yes this is true but to my eyes it is pleasing. Gives the images almost a dreamy look. Home developing the film will inevitably lead to such results. I think we have a certain amount of artistic interpretation with home done film where this is the end goal. A sort of perfection that arises the from the flaws. The Japanese call this aesthetic Wabi Sabi.

I do not find perfect colour balance an easily attainable or worthy goal with film. Close and recognizable is more than good.

I beg to differ on all accouts. Sorry.

 

[koraks]

Home developing the film will inevitably lead to such results.

Nope. Good color accuracy is possible in a home setting and it requires no more than reasonably fresh chemistry and reasonable process control.

 

[trendland]

Folks - yes : from a strong view there might be a little incorrectness from all!
Exposure, post processing a.s.o. but it looks OK or not?
For me it is great (guess the Op is not shooting films since 25 years like you ....hmmm?)

with regards

PS : My first shots have been total unsharp but I liked it much from an age of 5 1/2 years!

 

[MattKing]

Nope. Good color accuracy is possible in a home setting and it requires no more than reasonably fresh chemistry and reasonable process control.

+1

 

[Agulliver]

The colour rendition of Gold isn't my bag and that is represented in your photos....which are well composed but to me the colours are wrong. However, they are entirely what I would expect from Gold and clearly a lot of people like that look. You are happy with your photos, which is of primary importance.

 

[koraks]

I agree with @miha that there is a distinct cyan cast to all of these images. To a large extent this can be compensated in printing or digital PP. It is not an inherent characteristic of the film.

 

[macfred]

I used to shoot Kodak Color Gold 200 very often in the 90's.
Here's one with the Konica Hexar AF (flash mounted) and KODAK GOLD 200 (5096)


Another with Yashika 230AF - Yashinon AF 50 mm f/1.8 - Kodak Gold 200 (5096)

 

[miha]

Antonio, It didn't take me long to find these random, to my taste much nicer colours on flickr, all taken on Kodak Gold 200 film:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/wiissa/35476146474/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/93267186@N02/27717018440/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/40357601@N04/30828677418/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/53430551@N08/32445396957/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/chi_bellami/35242842863/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/chi_bellami/35395410574/

 

[Adrian Bacon]

In my mind, the colour caste is more cyan then green.
But that is one of the hazards of sharing images through the internet.

Agreed, the colors are a bit on the cyan side. Either the red channel needs more gain, or needs more contrast and more gain. Given that it’s overall green/cyan, probably more gain. Once the mid-tones start to even out, look at the highlights and shadows for color casts and that will inform you of which channels will need more or less contrast at that point.

 

[Gimenosaiz]

In my mind, the colour caste is more cyan then green.
But that is one of the hazards of sharing images through the internet.

Hello!!

Thank you your comment.
Honestly I don't see that caste ... Perhaps the rendition is not Gold and I'm doing something wrong along the process but I cannot see what cyan or green in any of my monitors.

Cheers!
Antonio

 

[Gimenosaiz]

Hello everybody!

Thank you again!! I feel very happy with this thread. THANK YOU!!

Although I like my results I think it is worthy to check it all again.
Perhaps a cyan tint is normal in some scenes as the day was a little misty ... there was blue in the air ;-)
Besides, I really think that most of you have a better trained eye than me to catch colors!
Miha examples give me a very close idea of what Kodak Gold 200 should look like. I still like it ;-)

I'm not a color shooter. Well, I was not a film shooter until 5 years ago. The last time I shoot color film before that was in my honeymoon (remember the first post).
I could scan some of the negatives. Agfa HDC film:

a.

Birmanía - Monte Kyaiktiyo by Antonio Gimeno, on Flickr

b.

Birmania - Inle by Antonio Gimeno, on Flickr

c.

Birmania - Sagaing by Antonio Gimeno, on Flickr

Kind regards, un abrazo para todos!
Antonio

 

[macfred]

...

I'm not a color shooter. Well, I was not a film shooter until 5 years ago. The last time I shoot color film before that was in my honeymoon (remember the first post).
I could scan some of the negatives. Agfa HDC film:

a.

Birmanía - Monte Kyaiktiyo by Antonio Gimeno, on Flickr

b.

Birmania - Inle by Antonio Gimeno, on Flickr

c.

Birmania - Sagaing by Antonio Gimeno, on Flickr

Great series Antonio - love those colours!

 

[Gimenosaiz]

Great series Antonio - love those colours!

Hello, Andreas!!

Thank you very much!! I enjoyed a lot !!

Kind regards,
Antonio

 

[Gimenosaiz]

Hello!!!

I've played a little bit.
I've scanned the negatives again and ...

A) Kodak Gold 200 scanned with Silverfast 8 SE with Negafix Kodak Gold 200 + CCR -> Imported to Lightroom (NO EDIT) -> Export jpg

A.1


A.2


A.3


A.4




B) Kodak Gold 200 scanned with Epson Scan with ICM profile -> > Imported to Lightroom + VSCO Preset Kodak Gold 200 (NO further EDIT) -> Export jpg

B.1


B.2


B.3


B.4


So ... madness !!!!! ;-)

By the way, which is your favourite web browser?
How do you watch your photographs in your computer?

Thank you!!!
Saludos
Antonio

 

[miha]

Much, much better Antonio.

 

[trendland]

Hello!!!

I've played a little bit.
I've scanned the negatives again and ...

A) Kodak Gold 200 scanned with Silverfast 8 SE with Negafix Kodak Gold 200 + CCR -> Imported to Lightroom (NO EDIT) -> Export jpg

This color look you got it here is indeed better! Perhaps you should note your "changes"

with regards
A.1


A.2


A.3


A.4




B) Kodak Gold 200 scanned with Epson Scan with ICM profile -> > Imported to Lightroom + VSCO Preset Kodak Gold 200 (NO further EDIT) -> Export jpg

B.1


B.2


B.3


B.4


So ... madness !!!!! ;-)

By the way, which is your favourite web browser?
How do you watch your photographs in your computer?

Thank you!!!
Saludos
Antonio

 

[Jon Buffington]

Gold 200 and ektar, same camera/lens, about 2-3 hours apart, same valley. Gold 200 is a very fine film and though grain can be slightly visible in the sky, it resolves very well and has pleasing colors. Both scanned on a kodak pakon f135+ scanner, both images basically straight scans (most likely added some sharpening, adjusted white/black points...basically could have done this in the scanner but use lr6 instead). Notice the warmer color pallette with the gold. Can be very pleasing.

Gold 200

Ektar 100

 

[Peter Schrager]

I like the gold 200 tones....

 

[trendland]

Gold 200 and ektar, same camera/lens, about 2-3 hours apart, same valley. Gold 200 is a very fine film and though grain can be slightly visible in the sky, it resolves very well and has pleasing colors. Both scanned on a kodak pakon f135+ scanner, both images basically straight scans (most likely added some sharpening, adjusted white/black points...basically could have done this in the scanner but use lr6 instead). Notice the warmer color pallette with the gold. Can be very pleasing.

Gold 200

Ektar 100

Jon - let me state : On my high resulution tablet screen there is no much difference between!
But that's a general problem from mixed workflow! In job I remember since decades the discussion about class 1 screens (8 times more expensive) calibration often helps - but the 100%
thing is visual enlarging from same workflow (what is academical BTW - regarding filtration)!

And then inspection between 2 enlargements - not from screen after scanning (would you agree?)

From my point the difference in colors is a bit more like to be seen here!
But the difference of 2 variating scanning software can also have a more impact than difference of 2 films wich are generally quite near side by side! (Not from resolution there is a great difference)
Would you also agree - well I am no scanning expert - but I could imagine!

with regards

 

[Agulliver]

There's quite a difference, and to me the Ektar is much better....but as I've said I never did like Gold. I find it tends to over-accentuate browns. Maybe it's just my eyes? As far as I am aware, part of the purpose of Gold (compared to VR) was to make dull days look a bit more bright/sunny. Good for the family snapshots, perhaps. I prefer dull days to look dull. With your lovely photos of the valley, the Ektar makes me feel I am there while the Gold makes me feel I am looking at a photograph....if that makes sense?

 

[1kgcoffee]

Gold is like having a built in 812 or 81A filter Vs Ektar which has more accurate colours. I suppose you could use a cooling filter with Gold. I do agree with you that Ektar looks better with this shot.

 

[Agulliver]

It's also just my preference for cooler shots over the warm colours which became fashionable in the late 80s...and which still are to some extent. In the end it comes down to personal preference. All of the OP's shots are well composed and technically they look excellent. The colour palette is down to personal choice. I guess by now most of us know what Gold, Ektar, Portra, Superia and Color Plus do...and can make our choices.

 

[Jon Buffington]

Yes, a very different pallette. Ektar is so much more natural and prefer it for landscapes. I like using my old kodak mini lab scanners because I can trust the colors, never could on any consumer flatbed/dedicated scanner.

Here is 1 more gold 200 from the same day but later...nice side light. The one above had the sun high in the sky. Thought it handled the scene very well