This thread is useless without pics:
Question about Kodak Gold 200
-
A
- Thread starter amellice
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
Want to Buy WTB: Toyo Field 45CF
- Started by Jessxi
-
For Sale Deardorff 5x7 (V5) Camera
- Started by Barlow
-
For Sale Deardorff 5x7 (V5) Camera with 4x5 Back
- Started by Barlow
-
Free 3 kits of kodak flexicolor developer, Free in Portland Oregon
- Started by Early Riser
-
For Sale Horseman 6x12 roll film back
- Started by OlliJ
Forum statistics
I'm impressed that I instantly recognized that as Chicago having only been there once, last April. Nice colors there...
Good idea - pictures... a contrast
Indeed, This thread is useless without pics
... Kodak Retina IIIc with 50mm Schneider lens
... exposure data: can't remember.
... lens hood but no filter.
... processing: reliable professional commercial processing.
... film: you tell me.
Indeed, This thread is useless without pics
... Kodak Retina IIIc with 50mm Schneider lens
... exposure data: can't remember.
... lens hood but no filter.
... processing: reliable professional commercial processing.
... film: you tell me.
Attachments
I have *never* seen any Kodak film product with the name Kodak Alaris on it. I've bought recent batches of D-76, TMAX 400, and Tri-X. All had the name Kodak on it and that's it.
I just dont think Alaris has any interest in promoting film. At all.
MattKing
Moderator
I've seen a couple of chemicals with Kodak Alaris branding, but no film so far.
Most recently, T-Max RS developer, in new packaging. That was at Glazer's in Seattle, WA USA.
I figure that they must still have a bunch of packaging with Eastman Kodak's name on it.
Most recently, T-Max RS developer, in new packaging. That was at Glazer's in Seattle, WA USA.
I figure that they must still have a bunch of packaging with Eastman Kodak's name on it.
OP
OP
I don't understand you got plus instead of gold? To be honest I didn't by mine from B&H I got it from Amazon but it's soldout on Amazon now
OP
OP
Why Brian's photos look less saturated than the others? Is this a result of wrong temp during processing or underdev? This is why this thread was started anyway 
If these are negative scans, I'd say there is very little you conclude about the color palette or saturation of this or any film based on them. That's not to say they don't look great...
I thought I was clear, but let he clarify: yes, I ordered Gold200 from a NYC firm and was sent ColorPlus200. When I complained the customer service rep said that it was a substitution of same stuff in different packaging. After testing and determining that it isn't, they balked at return/refund and I gave up. so ordered from another NYC firm and they did the same substitution. Since the quantity was much smaller I didn't pursue a complaint, dumped the film, and re-purchased from a LA shop in person so I could see what I was getting without any surprises.
Why Brian's photos look less saturated than the others? Is this a result of wrong temp during processing or underdev? This is why this thread was started anyway
No, this was the color palette of the Colorplus film when processed by several different professional processing firms. Never had any problems with any of the 2 places I have film processed at in the past so blaming them is purely speculative with not much basis. In fact, I seem to recall those pics being processed in the same batch with some Gold200, which is why I claim to have evidence to support my theory while others seem to rely primarily on speculation.
p.s. I actually don't hate the muted color palate of that film in some situations. What I dislike is expecting the color palette of Gold and getting that instead. What I hate is some minimum-wage sales yokel telling lies about how the two films are the same... when they clearly are not.
But truth be told... I should have guessed what was going to happen when they were clearly advertising Gold200, with a picture of Gold200 packaging, at ColorPlus prices.
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2011
- Messages
- 321
- Format
- Multi Format
FWIW, mine are negative scans. The first two are shot through a Canon 50/1.5 LTM, and the second pair with a Voigtländer Skopar 50/3.5 (pre-war, uncoated). Both lenses tend toward fairly high saturation in the right conditions (the Voigtländer is more particular, as you might expect from an uncoated lens). I did not alter the saturation on any of them.
OP
OP
how cheaper we're talking about? I've a friend flying from US to Japan in June, maybe I can ask him to get me some Provia and Velvia. For 35mm Provia 100F costs now $10 and Velvia 100 costs $11 and Velvia 50 costs $12. Maybe if they are cheaper in Japan I'll ask him to get me these beauties
So colorplus 200 is NOT Gold 200? However the canister for G200 on the B&H website is marked "Kodak 200", just as Colorplus 200 is...
No, it isn't and never was. Colourplus is based/is Kodacolor VR 200, an emulsion from the 80s. Gold 200 is a lot more modern.
Going through some of the Koda Alaris sites in several languages and different countries, there is no mention of Colourplus 200 film. All they mention is Gold 200 and Ultramax 400.
Flavio
If you want, just give me the DX code on the cassette and I'll check the databases. It is a 6 number printed on the cassette near the felt trap.
Going through some of the Koda Alaris sites in several languages and different countries, there is no mention of Colourplus 200 film. All they mention is Gold 200 and Ultramax 400.
Flavio
If you want, just give me the DX code on the cassette and I'll check the databases. It is a 6 number printed on the cassette near the felt trap.
Recently when you buy "Gold" what you get is the canister in the middle of this image, "Colorplus" is on the right and the original canister for Gold is on the left.
I doubt if we pay an extra for other than the different canister recently.
Someone will tell may be [emoji4]
The ColorPlus I had looked just like the canister in the (correction) right. It was packaged in Mexico... or maybe Brazil... I can't recall exactly. Mine was purchased in 2013 or 2014, and was exiry dated sometime in 2016. I haven't seen one with the work "Kodacolor" on a film can for a long time.
When I buy Gold200 in the 3-pack it is the canister on the (correction) middle... that clearly indicates Gold 200 on the cardboard packaging.
I'm in the US, Sagai... where are you? (EDIT: Oh, yes.. Hungary. I should not only read, but retain what I read!]
p.s. I actually like your railway photo, even with the muted tones. I probably would have shot it with Portra so the effect may have been similar.
When I buy Gold200 in the 3-pack it is the canister on the (correction) middle... that clearly indicates Gold 200 on the cardboard packaging.
I'm in the US, Sagai... where are you? (EDIT: Oh, yes.. Hungary. I should not only read, but retain what I read!]
p.s. I actually like your railway photo, even with the muted tones. I probably would have shot it with Portra so the effect may have been similar.
Last edited by a moderator:
It is my belief that one cannot believe the picture since it contradicts the description. They have been informed several times but they chose not to correct the error.
The writing on cassettes is 100% Madison Avenue text. if you photo the long number next to the inner side of the velvet trap, which is there for the photofinishers, it may be closer to the truth.
Film is free here for whoever comes first , but with a rule , until you can find a seller
Sagai,
I would like to see the other side of these cassettes, please.
Just check if the DX number on the other side:
see if Colourplus is 512714
and the Kodak 200 in the middle if is 512504.
Thanks!
I would like to see the other side of these cassettes, please.
Just check if the DX number on the other side:
see if Colourplus is 512714
and the Kodak 200 in the middle if is 512504.
Thanks!
| 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:  |