More samples https://www.instagram.com/p/CbXcGzFL6rS it’s looking really nice!
Kodak Gold Now Available in 120 - threads merged
-
A
- Thread starter GarageBoy
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale FS: Linhof Recessed lens board
- Started by dirkfletcher
-
For Sale Leica M4-2
- Started by chriscrawfordphoto
-
For Sale FS: Toyo Sliding Back for 4x5 Graflok
- Started by B.S.Kumar
Forum statistics
It's all of interest to me. I have a colorful family. Never had a significant problem for casual photography (135 Gold and other) but, oddly, it has been problematic with professional portrait studios. I think they just printed wonky and in a very displeasing way... with little customer satisfaction in mind because they repeatedly pushed back that they were printed "accurately". We paid enough for them that they are still in original packaging, and in the closet... can't bring ourselves to throwing them away (yet). It is nice to hear that some folks, including Kodak, has that situation in consideration.
I'd love to hear more about the reformulation and new backing paper. Do you think the backing paper is the improved backing paper released after the mottling/bleedthrough problems, or something newer? Does it have have numbers for ruby-window cameras?
Pro is what you make of it. When I was shooting portraits for $$ I used portra, of course, but I did use Gold 200 a lot too. I made some good money using it. So I guess you could call it pro if you want. It is a great portrait film especially exposed at 100 ISO. The color punches up and shifts away from the warm just a tad... almost looked like portra 160 at 100 ISO with a touch more grain. I really liked it. I can see myself using Gold 200 for a lot of shooting when I don't have money to just burn on portra... In fact I am starting a new project this spring and was trying to decide what stock to use and now I may just use Gold 200.
D.
D.
Just went to look and I don't see this at either Freestyle or B&H. Looks like I'll have to jump to the top of the thread and find out who has it to sell.
Edit: no such link. Looks like we get to drool until the usual suspects get it into stock.
Edit: no such link. Looks like we get to drool until the usual suspects get it into stock.
Hurray!
will be interesting to see how they price it. I'll give a few rolls a try. its always nice to get another film to shoot, especially in 120. but does the 35mm demand really apply to 120? Not trying to be an ass, but most of the 35mm guys scan and they will as well on 120. I would love to see how the gold in 120 enlarges as well as scans.
I hope that the gold 120 becomes a hot selling film, as I would really love a lower cost 4x5 color choice. But realistically, I know that will lever happen.
john
I hope that the gold 120 becomes a hot selling film, as I would really love a lower cost 4x5 color choice. But realistically, I know that will lever happen.
john
MattKing
Moderator
The "Professional" designation has for some time now been used to designate the distribution channel that the product is intended for, not the quality of the product.
The "consumer" films are marketed to be sold in grocery and drug stores. The "professional" films are marketed to be sold in photographic outlets. Things like minimum order quantities are a main practical difference.
I mean, Lomo 100/400/800 have been around for a while, and until the price hike a week and a half or so ago they were priced about the same per roll as Gold 120 is expected to be (~$8-9/roll). And those films are consumer-grade color negative stocks coated by Kodak.
As an aside, I’m sure the Lomo price hike has NOTHING AT ALL to do with Kodak wanting to clear a price point in the market for Gold in 120. I don’t blame them (at least for Lomo 100 and 400). And I’ll be happy to have a cheaper option with Kodak’s better quality control - I sometimes get “fat rolls” with Lomo and it’s maddening.
I’m with you there 100%! Will also be buying a couple of rolls of Adox Color Mission. It’s important to support good things.
Why would I use it when I can Porta or Ektar? Well living in the Desert Southwest I would shoot in the summer as I expect like the 35mm version it will not require refrigeration.
Being a professional listed film now, does that mean this needs refrigeration, or can it be left at room temperature?
Freestyle has it listed now, due for delivery April 8th. Get ready as this will sell. They have it listed for $50 US dollars for a 5 pak. So 10 bucks a roll. About what I expected for it.
Others have it cheaper. Blue Moon Camera in Portland has it listed for $8.50/roll.
Honestly, I've found that Freestyle doesn't often have the best prices. Combined with their lack of free shipping (no matter how much you spend) and I usually get my film from other sources.
MattKing
Moderator
That hasn't applied to any film for decades.
It wasn't strictly necessary even back in the day when there was more than one version of the films marketed to the professional user, except when that professional user needed to do precise colour work and went from batch to batch - think catalog shooters.
The "consumer" and "professional" films are relatively similar now - none of them benefit from sitting at room temperatures + for long periods of time, but with the exception of slide films for projection, reasonable care will result in excellent colour response.
MattKing
Moderator
Both Porta and Ektar recommend refrigeration, last I shot Ektar 100 120 mm in the summer heat when we hit temps in the high 100s, like 107 to 109, even a few hours in heat then a few days in the SUV with hours of sitting in the sun while I was out shooting, I noticed some color shift. Kodak and Fuji 100, 200 in 35mm, no issues.
Great to have a mainstream colour emulsion in 120 again.
Traditionally pro film designation would indicate cold storage and optimised colour balance from new.
https://casualphotophile.com/wp-con...ce-Between-Professional-and-Consumer-Film.pdf
However practically in this case (tech pub straight update of 135) seems to indicate a 120 film in ‘ pro’ 5 packs presumably as kodak conversion is set up for that packaging with distribution via photo stores.
https://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites/default/files/files/products/E7022.pdf
For wider distribution the packaging would probably need to be in singles or 3 packs. Expect this was an internal discussion point but no doubt some dealers will split packs. Intro pricing of £44 in uk is welcome, although that was the pro pricing point only recently.
(Boots pharmacies in the uk sell HP5 in 120 remarkably) .
Traditionally pro film designation would indicate cold storage and optimised colour balance from new.
https://casualphotophile.com/wp-con...ce-Between-Professional-and-Consumer-Film.pdf
However practically in this case (tech pub straight update of 135) seems to indicate a 120 film in ‘ pro’ 5 packs presumably as kodak conversion is set up for that packaging with distribution via photo stores.
https://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites/default/files/files/products/E7022.pdf
For wider distribution the packaging would probably need to be in singles or 3 packs. Expect this was an internal discussion point but no doubt some dealers will split packs. Intro pricing of £44 in uk is welcome, although that was the pro pricing point only recently.
(Boots pharmacies in the uk sell HP5 in 120 remarkably) .
MattKing
Moderator
It is. As per the Kodak Alaris website: http://imaging.kodakalaris.com/photographers/film/color
Here is the data sheet, which also covers the 35mm product (on acetate base): http://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites/default/files/files/products/E7022.pdf
Here is the FAQ page - note that it shares the new, advanced backing paper: http://imaging.kodakalaris.com/site...ts/Kodak Professional Gold 120 FAQs_Final.pdf
And finally the press release: http://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites/default/files/files/products/Gold 120 Press Release_FINAL.pdf
In this respect it's somewhat similar to ProImage 100: a more consumer-quality film nevertheless sold under the "Kodak Professional" banner.
I rather thought of TAC base of different thickness. Well, there had been the recent base supply issue, you likely refer too. But actually I would be surprised if they did a special run for the rollfilm version. We shall see. In any case it is promising to see more variety of offer.
Yes thats a good comparison, both entry level films, pro image started out as a ‘pro film’ for specific markets and their price needs and this is a pro film marketed at ‘amateurs moving to medium format’. The choice of gold for 120 was presumably due to sales volumes but also to avoid a clash with existing supply agreements with lomography.
Gold; maybe better skin tones than ektar more vivid/punch than portra and cool analog grain It will be interesting to compare to lomo 100 in 120.
Is it, the film that is professional or the eye looking through the viewfinder?
GOOD, BETTER, BEST.
EVERY PRICE POINT
YOUNG PHOTOGRAPHER
EXPERIENCED PHOTOGRAPHER
EVERY PRICE POINT
YOUNG PHOTOGRAPHER
EXPERIENCED PHOTOGRAPHER
MattKing
Moderator
They no longer make their own acetate base, so it would not surprise me if they were intending to move to Estar for all 120.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |