Theres too many men
Too many people
Making too many problems
And not much love to go round
Cant you see
This is a land of confusion
Yes but as was pointed out by someone who worked in a lab they want to know when they are cross processing so that they can rebalance their chemistry,
So just badging an E6 film as C41 process is subterfuge and rather deceptive.
Ian
All Rollei-Maco input about the CN200, CR200 and the related Crossbird and Redbird films seems to be deleted from APUG.
By deleting threads the only information source is the German http://www.aphog.de forum where you can only read in German about these new products.
[...] Unfortunately a small group of people, or maybe even just one or two with multiple aliases began posting about Maco products all over the place, it was obviously a concerted effort to raise Maco/Rollei's profile in a rather under hand way.
[...]
But some APUG members who are German speakers feel that those same people who posted here are also ruining Aphog.
[...]
Ian
To take the thread back to its original subject, I've just gotten my first roll of the E-6 CR200 back from Dwayne's. I haven't shot slide film since I was a kid, so I'm not at all confident that I can discern much about the film itself, but I'm fairly happy with the results, all things considered.
It looks like I underexposed a touch; the slides look good when held up to a bright light, but it has to be a *bright* light to see them clearly, and on scanning them (or I assume projecting them, but I can't find the projector!) it becomes clear that some shadow detail is missing. The colours seem quite nice to my eye, not particularly saturated but quite realistic; I shot through a warming filter and I think it was more than I needed.
But the film looks pretty grainy, enough to impair the sense of sharpness in the images. It's a 200 ASA film, of course; I don't expect miracles, but it seems grainier than my expectations even with that in mind. Is this the same thing other users are finding, or is it a side effect of underexposure?
Thanks
-NT
It is rather grainy. More so than E200.
I wouldn't say that the grain is similar to Kodachrome. Kodachrome less grainy than this.
It was called SCANFILM because someone got it through their head that it would scan better and make "purer" colors without an orange base. Someone forgot that most consumer geared scanners including the ones on minilabs are set up for films with an orange base and its a pain in the ass to get correct results or even make a decent channel for a maskless color neg film. The other part about it being a color and B/W film had something to do with it being a royal pain in the ass to print an orange based color neg onto b/w paper.
Hello guys!
It's been a while since last messages in this topic. Could anyone share their images and impressions of this film?
Uh, isn't this film dead? Didn't Agfa (Belgium) discontinue it?
No, it's still available, at least in the UK: http://www.firstcall-photographic.c...ilm/c41-all?filter=1&f_brand=143&f_price=5-94
Thank YouThere is a Flickr group for these films with tons of samples: https://www.flickr.com/groups/digibase/
If you check out this thread:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)
you will see that different photographers have achieved very different results from this film.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?