Question about Kodak Gold 200

[Photo Engineer]

All of the supposition gets nowhere. And I'm sorry that you are shocked deeming my answer unreasonable.

It is not unreasonable to question coming to conclusions with little, no or questionable data. And that is what seems to be taking place. So far, IMHO the answers are all way off the mark with information that I knew 20 or 30 years ago, and since Kodak is silent then we are all in the dark. Sorry, but I have no answer for you at all. Just a way to get to the possible answer.

PE

 

[BrianShaw]

The only point I'll continue to disagree with is that all of the supposition gets nowhere.

What part of the answers is way off the mark? You keep implying that and now said it as a personal belief; I'm really curious.

 

[wblynch]

After 40 years of working deep inside Dozens of Fortune 100 corporations and witnessing their practices and strategies, my perspective is that a firm in Kodak's position is unlikely to produce two stocks of the slightest difference when it's economically and logistically more expedient to make one and put two different labels on the same.

Especially when those products do not overlap in the same market (and many times, even then).

Occam's Razor

 

[BrianShaw]

No doubt. In fact, I'd speculate that it is even so unlikely that the probability of them producing two different emulsions for color 200 film is near zero. But I'm not the only one who has experienced differences between the two films. Am I crazy, hallucinating, or just making up a story?

 

[Photo Engineer]

Both Wblynch and BrianShaw are are correct to an extent.

However, you ever go to the grocery store and buy a nationally known brand and compare it to the store brand? I've had people say they are the same, but when I suggest they compare them side by side they tell me that there was more water and less vegetable in the can of store brand green beans, so, there are two theories that go against each other. You two guys and the "store brand" test. One says they are the same (or should be using logic) and the other says they are different. The difference saved money and allowed the store to sell their beans at a lower cost even though the beans may have been grown in the same field and packed in the same plant.

I have seen both take place.

The tests so far cannot tell me which is true!

PE

 

[BrianShaw]

One last try. You keep saying everything said here is wrong. Your only other significant assertion is that nobody has done a scientific study. I agree that the latter is true but what is it that you assert to be false? Let's talk film - Kodak Gold 200 and Kodak ColorPlus - not green beans and canned corn.

If you are trying to say there is no way that the OP is right that Gold is muted color then we can agree. if you are trying to say that we may never find out what exactly ColorPlus is because Kodak won't say and you don't know, that's understandable. If you are saying that no difference exists between the two films because there's no scientific study then I feel you are blindly ignoring the observation of at least one intelligent person.

I posted pictures of ColorPlus. Does that look like Gold quality and color palate to you?

I have no interest in pursuing this conversation with you just to be annoying. I'm truly curious about your doubts and seek clarity. It's hard to understand someone's position when the only statement is along the lines of I think your wrong because I think your wrong.

 

[flavio81]

Isn't sheer speculation nice?

Yes, Ron, sheer speculation not only is nice but it's also FUN!!

So, keeping in line with the speculation, let me play the game and speculate that Colorplus 200 and Gold 200 are exactly the same emulsion, BUT Colorplus 200 is leftover stock that did not sell during the circa. 2008-2014 "film debacle" years, while Gold 200 might be either (a) current production or (b) the latest batch.

Another option (More speculation) SPECULATION SPREE!!

The "Lucky" film factory produced color negative emulsions under license from Kodak and/or the Kodak Chinese factory used to produce color neg emulsions with technology related to Kodacolor Gold.

Colorplus 200 is the remaining stock from this factory. BTW the enthusiasts from lomography widely believe that the stock of the Lomo color neg ISO 100, 400, and 800 film that was marked as "made in china" came from the chinese Kodak factory and was based in Kodacolor VR. The ones marked "made in italy" have been identified as Ferrania.

And the slightly "muted" colors would be explained by the stock being not so "fresh". Color neg film loses speed with age (and in my personal experience Gold 100/200 from 1997 lost more speed than Fuji Superia 100 from the same date, stored under the same conditions). When the film loses speed, it gets slightly underexposed when used at box speed, which will give prints with less contrast, which subjectively is seen by the eye as reduced color saturation. It would, thus, be interesting to shoot Colorplus 200 at ISO 100!

PS: I found your response to this topic reasonable, and, as an engineer myself, I find very professional from you that you take the care not to release Kodak's private information if you're not entitled to do so.

Kind regards,
Flavio

 

[BrianShaw]

3 engineers... You, me, and Ron. No wonder we are so passionate! I wonder if Bill is one also.

 

[BrianShaw]

Interesting theory Flávio.

 

[flavio81]

3 engineers... You, me, and Ron. No wonder we are so passionate! I wonder if Bill is one also.

Yes but that's were my similarity ends with Photo Engineer. Rowland (PE) is a legend in this forum, his name is on some important Kodachrome patents, and he has written the APUG tutorials in emulsion making -- which were the main reason i signed to APUG in the first place. PE = Real Engineer, Flavio = amateur.

 

[flavio81]

Interesting theory Flavio.

Thanks! I had such Gold 200 film (dated 1997), i recall i exposed a roll at ISO 100 to compensate, and i got well exposed negatives which were then scanned by a minilab. The colors were well saturated and punchy, but with a color cast. I could balance the highlights for the color cast but the colors were never totally right. This because the color cast changes with the lightness value (and perhaps due to other factors as well). However, i liked the results.

I wish I had shot more Gold film in the past. Maybe because I tended to high ISO films and Superia 800 and 1600 were excellent for my uses.

 

[BrianShaw]

I have great respect for Ron and all of his experience. But after 35 years in science and engineering myself I value discussion and information sharing. Every engineer I know accepts observation and analysis as a valid alternative to demonstration or test at times. This may be of those times. I'm truly interested in understanding his doubts andperspective.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Well, the Soviets had a saying that there is no izvestia in pravda and no pravda in izvestia. These two Soviet era newspapers were Truth and News. You can supply your own very easy translation.

Kodak is not talking to me or anyone. So, without having the two films exposed and processed under the same conditions, and with the variability of processes nowdays, what can be said about speed or grain or color? That is my point. I have no answer, but I have suspicions and I like to post facts and not suspiciouns. But, I do know that all else is supposition. But, maybe someone here has the truth. I cannot say and none of us can say for sure until a test is run.

The bottom line is, for all of the electrons whizzing around, who cares? It matters not one whit if you like the result and if you don't, change films and/or lab.

PE

 

[BrianShaw]

I guess the only difference between what you an I are saying is the level of rigor on "exposed and processed the same." You want indisputable scientific rigor and I'm satisfied with a more practical level of rigor. Sure, I'd rather journal quality science too but...

For sure, K is silent.

And for sure it is confounding when some folks have contradictory experience or opinion. But that's life and that's why we have the mathematics of statistics. Not everything, even good science, is perfectly binary. Oh how I wish but...

Let's go in peace!

 

[flavio81]

Well, the Soviets had a saying that there is no izvestia in pravda and no pravda in izvestia. These two Soviet era newspapers were Truth and News. You can supply your own very easy translation.

LOL!!

 

[sagai]

Is there any way to determine identical characteristics of emulsions for comparison rather than chasing same exposure and same processing ?

 

[wblynch]

I am a software engineer (not a real engineer) but my expertise of turning business requirements into deliverable systems always had me deep in executive strategy meetings and initiatives concerned with marketing, product planning, mergers, acquisitions and asset retirements. (plants, process centers and human resources).

A lot of data and financial analysis to back up business decisions that had already been made. I've always had my hands in the most sensitive data of these many businesses and know how they think. LOL

 

[Photo Engineer]

Is there any way to determine identical characteristics of emulsions for comparison rather than chasing same exposure and same processing ?

In today's market, processing varies so much that the answer to your question is a big NO. In a bygone era, it would be just barely possible and might take a lot of measurements. We always did side by side to be on the safe side.

PE

 

[Xmas]

In today's market, processing varies so much that the answer to your question is a big NO. In a bygone era, it would be just barely possible and might take a lot of measurements. We always did side by side to be on the safe side.

PE

Step wedges and densiometry and batching end to end through same mini lab are all very well but two different lenses can make a big difference as well.

 

[wblynch]

Not to mention the roll to roll difference in storage and shipping environments before you even got to load them into the two different cameras with two different lenses.

If it takes that much to determine if there is a difference, does it even matter?

We're getting crazy here.

 

[BrianShaw]

I think we're getting a bit crazy here imagining huge differences based on fairly unlikely possibilities. Nobody is factoring in the phase of the moon, or Venus... Why not that too.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Step wedges and densiometry and batching end to end through same mini lab are all very well but two different lenses can make a big difference as well.

Yes, that is why at EK we used the same camera and lens with fixed lighting, or we bought special matched lenses and cameras from the mfgrs. at a huge price over what you guys paid for yours.

I have examples of those tests saved from a wastebasket before I retired.

But as far as keeping and other problems, yes, they enter into it as well and an averaging method might need to be used. Generally, we used fresh EK film, product from EK and others from normal retail outlets and compared all to each other, and thus we got to see EK fresh vs EK at retail outlets vs others. So you can see why I feel that this test would be difficult. And somewhat useless.

Oh, and we used more than one processor such as EK and outside photo labs with anonymous labeling so our film got customer type treatment.

PE

 

[sagai]

Okay, so for me the scientific approach is than as long as I like that color film I carry on with it.
We are burning our hours here guys

 

[ME Super]

Well, the Soviets had a saying that there is no izvestia in pravda and no pravda in izvestia. These two Soviet era newspapers were Truth and News. You can supply your own very easy translation.

On a sign leaving the old Lehrter Stadtbahnhof (where the Hauptbahnhof now stands) in Berlin, headed east: Achtung Reisende! Letzter bahnhof in richtung Sowjetsektor.

Sorry, couldn't resist. I bet PE can read and understand that. If not, there's always Google Translate.

The bottom line is, for all of the electrons whizzing around, who cares? It matters not one whit if you like the result and if you don't, change films and/or lab.

What he said. Color negative just doesn't do it for me, with the exception of Ektar and Portra 400 (haven't tried 800 yet so no idea on that one). I can get really nice photos using B&W Negative and E-6, so that's mostly what I use. Sadly these days, we're pretty much stuck with what's available, until PE creates plans for an all-in-one coater/finisher that can be printed on a 3D printer so we can all make our own color films at home! Just kidding, PE, we're all glad you're around to share your knowledge with us. Even if we're not set up to make our own film (yet).

 

[Photo Engineer]

Yeah, I read it right off. They took their cue from the Soviet joke!

PE