Shanghai GP3 100 220 - still an unfinished product?

[MultiFormat Shooter]

https://shop.shjcfilm.com/collections/b-w-negative/products/shanghai-gp3-100-220

New version and fresh 220, fixed old 400 220 backing paper and emulsion issue

Do you know if there is USA-based wholesaler/source of this film? I'd like to try it, in the Mamiya 645AFD II, but I don't like dealing with international shipping, if I can help it.

 

[Huss]

Do you know if there is USA-based wholesaler/source of this film? I'd like to try it, in the Mamiya 645AFD II, but I don't like dealing with international shipping, if I can help it.

Amazon - got it next day.

 

[Huss]

I do not trust it based on your initial reports and lack of need of 220 film.

It's a shame that you are unwilling to spend $8 on a roll of 120 and find out for yourself, but instead trust the noise on the internet.

I guess curiosity, independence and free will are things of the past for some.

Butt hay - Photrio! New things BAD!

 

[Sirius Glass]

It's a shame that you are unwilling to spend $8 on a roll of 120 and find out for yourself, but instead trust the noise on the internet.

I guess curiosity, independence and free will are things of the past for some.

Butt hay - Photrio! New things BAD!

I have a freezer full of color and black & white film for three different formats. I am watching your testing and I will taking in your comments and results the next time I buy film.

 

[MattKing]

I do not trust it based on your initial reports and lack of need of 220 film.

It's a shame that you are unwilling to spend $8 on a roll of 120 and find out for yourself, but instead trust the noise on the internet.

I guess curiosity, independence and free will are things of the past for some.

Butt hay - Photrio! New things BAD!

This seems unnecessary.
It is fine to discuss the reasons that someone may or may not choose to make a film buying decision.
But slagging someone - not to mention the entire community - for relying on someone else's freely shared experience really isn't all that appropriate.

 

[redbandit]

There is nothing wrong with Ilford's quality. You are just twisted out of shape because you had a few roll of 120 with paper problems. All the film manufactures had the same problem at the same time.

ill say it again. READ the stuff i said. I said NOTHIGN about having used a roll of ilford 120 film, not even one with bad wrappers. So stop putting your thoughts or complaints against ilford into MY writing or thought.

 

[Klaus_H]

Shanghai GP3 100 (220) is like a grab bag.

I purchased 10 GP3 220 in November 2022 and 10 GP3 220 in December 2022.
All 20 films have the same data on the boxes (Emulsion number: 3101 - Develop before: 2024-02).
The first 8 films (November delivery) I used behaved like FOMApan 100 ( see my post #236 in this thread ).
But ...
Yesterday I developed film the 9th film and it was total different to the 8 other films.
The color of the water used to pre-soak had been light green for the fist 8 films. The color was dark gray-blue on film #9.
The film requieres different developing times than the first 8 films.
And ... The film had a bright, looped stripe in the middle of the film over its entire length.

Since I was uncertain, I performed another test. I exposed a film from the December delivery with a gray card (Zone I to Zone X at 100 ASA). I split the film in half and developed both halves in separate tanks. One film with ATOMAL 49 and one film with FX39. The results were exactly the same as with film 9. There was no FOMApan 100 like film and the error in the emulsion was also present.
I think I will dispose of the remaining films.
As much as I like 220 format films, I will not be using "exotic" films in the future.

Farewell Shanghai GP3 !

 

[John Wiegerink]

Now I’m worried about my ten rolls that are to arriv today. it had better not be Foma 100.

 

[Klaus_H]

Whatever is in the GP3 box, las long as the boxes have the same emulsion number printed on, ist must be the same material.
I did receive 2 different films with same emulsion number on the box.
Was it an oversight, or is it a business model? Who knows ....

 

[John Wiegerink]

Whatever is in the GP3 box, las long as the boxes have the same emulsion number printed on, ist must be the same material.
I did receive 2 different films with same emulsion number on the box.
Was it an oversight, or is it a business model? Who knows ....

I just want it to be the same GP3 film I used right after they started reproducing from the factory make-over (if they really did). That was a very good product and I had no complaints. I just don't understand the ties with Foma and Shanghai GP3. How could Foma 100 get into Shanghai GP3 boxes? If that is truly the case, then what I said earlier might be true. Shanghai might have closed down their coating and film fabricating line and went to Foma for that part of production. All I know is that if I want Foma 100, I'll buy Foma 100. If I want Shanghai GP3, I'll buy Shanghai GP3. I don't want a crap shoot!

 

[Sirius Glass]

Shanghai GP3 100 (220) is like a grab bag.

I purchased 10 GP3 220 in November 2022 and 10 GP3 220 in December 2022.
All 20 films have the same data on the boxes (Emulsion number: 3101 - Develop before: 2024-02).
The first 8 films (November delivery) I used behaved like FOMApan 100 ( see my post #236 in this thread ).
But ...
Yesterday I developed film the 9th film and it was total different to the 8 other films.
The color of the water used to pre-soak had been light green for the fist 8 films. The color was dark gray-blue on film #9.
The film requieres different developing times than the first 8 films.
And ... The film had a bright, looped stripe in the middle of the film over its entire length.

Since I was uncertain, I performed another test. I exposed a film from the December delivery with a gray card (Zone I to Zone X at 100 ASA). I split the film in half and developed both halves in separate tanks. One film with ATOMAL 49 and one film with FX39. The results were exactly the same as with film 9. There was no FOMApan 100 like film and the error in the emulsion was also present.
I think I will dispose of the remaining films.
As much as I like 220 format films, I will not be using "exotic" films in the future.

Farewell Shanghai GP3 !

It looks like it was x-rayed or run through a CT scanner at the airport.

 

[Henning Serger]

How could Foma 100 get into Shanghai GP3 boxes?

Maybe just on the 'official way', John: Shanghai bought the film from Foma for own confectioning and rebranding.
At least it is well-known for years that Foma is delivering their films to rebranding companies: Arista EDU is Fomapan, Lomography Earl Grey and Lady Grey film is Fomapan, Kosmo Foto Mono is Fomapan......

All I know is that if I want Foma 100, I'll buy Foma 100. If I want Shanghai GP3, I'll buy Shanghai GP3.

+1.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Lomography Earl Grey and Lady Grey film is Fomapan, Kosmo Foto Mono is Fomapan......

At a higher price than Foma original film, which means the market for Kosmo and the B&W Lomography branded films rather odd.

 

[Henning Serger]

At a higher price than Foma original film, which means the market for Kosmo and the B&W Lomography branded films rather odd.

Of course at a higher price . Foma, Harman technology and Kodak (which delivers their amateur negative films to Lomography) have learned from their mistakes in the past when they have sold film for rebranding too cheap, damaging their own profits and market share.
Now they are selling at a much higher price which makes it impossible for the rebranding companies to undercut the price of the original film.

For us as consumers it does not make sense at all to buy rebranded stuff at (often much) higher prices compared to the original films. We just loose money, and don't get anything in return.
And for the whole film community the rebranding is also problematic, because the market in total is loosing purchasing power and sales / production volume: Our budgets as photographers are limited. For one photographer that mybe 100€ p.a., for another one 200€, for a third one 500€.
No matter where the individual limit is, each photographer has a certain limit.

And with that limited budget each photographer can buy much more film as original film compared to the same film types as more expensive rebranded stuff. The film manufacturers sell more film when photographers buy original instead of repackaged.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[John Wiegerink]

Maybe just on the 'official way', John: Shanghai bought the film from Foma for own confectioning and rebranding.
At least it is well-known for years that Foma is delivering their films to rebranding companies: Arista EDU is Fomapan, Lomography Earl Grey and Lady Grey film is Fomapan, Kosmo Foto Mono is Fomapan......



+1.

Best regards,
Henning

Henning,
Thanks for the very clear explanation, it sucks, but it is what it is I guess. All I wanted was to buy GP3 film that was made exactly like the last GP3 film I used several years ago. My GP3 arrives today, and I'll know one way or the other if it's the same.
It used to be, when a company had a very good or excellent product, they wouldn't let anyone rebrand or even copy it. Now, when a company has a good product, they may decide for cost reasons or more profit reasons to just put some other companies inferior product in their well respected wrapper. HAVE THEY NO SHAME! I guess not. It all boils down to how many pennies they can fill their pockets with and what we are willing to turn a blind eye too.
I'm sure glad and can't wait for that study to come out as to what films are really put into those film wrappers and boxes. This whole film rebranding thing is a big fiasco. I might be the only one, but I won't pay more for any rebranded film when I can buy the real thing. The problem with Shanghai GP3 is that this was and is supposed to be a real film company that "USED" to make its own film. So you actually think you are buying "real" GP3 "made in China" film
I wish we could get that nice Chinese fellow that claimed to be a representative for Shanghai Films to come back on Photrio and explain to us how this film is manufactured in China. Hmmmm, where is he now?

 

[Cholentpot]

Henning,
Thanks for the very clear explanation, it sucks, but it is what it is I guess. All I wanted was to buy GP3 film that was made exactly like the last GP3 film I used several years ago. My GP3 arrives today, and I'll know one way or the other if it's the same.
It used to be, when a company had a very good or excellent product, they wouldn't let anyone rebrand or even copy it. Now, when a company has a good product, they may decide for cost reasons or more profit reasons to just put some other companies inferior product in their well respected wrapper. HAVE THEY NO SHAME! I guess not. It all boils down to how many pennies they can fill their pockets with and what we are willing to turn a blind eye too.
I'm sure glad and can't wait for that study to come out as to what films are really put into those film wrappers and boxes. This whole film rebranding thing is a big fiasco. I might be the only one, but I won't pay more for any rebranded film when I can buy the real thing. The problem with Shanghai GP3 is that this was and is supposed to be a real film company that "USED" to make its own film. So you actually think you are buying "real" GP3 "made in China" film
I wish we could get that nice Chinese fellow that claimed to be a representative for Shanghai Films to come back on Photrio and explain to us how this film is manufactured in China. Hmmmm, where is he now?

Locked down I'd assume.

 

[Henning Serger]

Henning,
Thanks for the very clear explanation,

John, no problem at all, you're welcome.

it sucks, but it is what it is I guess. All I wanted was to buy GP3 film that was made exactly like the last GP3 film I used several years ago. My GP3 arrives today, and I'll know one way or the other if it's the same.

Please let us know then.

I'm sure glad and can't wait for that study to come out as to what films are really put into those film wrappers and boxes.

It is a real "film community project", and everyone who has experience in film testing can join in. It would be very nice if you and Klaus could add your test results to the final data base!

This whole film rebranding thing is a big fiasco. I might be the only one, but I won't pay more for any rebranded film when I can buy the real thing.

Completely reasonable and understandable.

The problem with Shanghai GP3 is that this was and is supposed to be a real film company that "USED" to make its own film. So you actually think you are buying "real" GP3 "made in China" film
I wish we could get that nice Chinese fellow that claimed to be a representative for Shanghai Films to come back on Photrio and explain to us how this film is manufactured in China.

Real film factories with own emulsion making and coating need a certain size. I know for sure, as I have visited several film factories . And even the smallest ones have a size which cannot be "hidden" somewhere.
The existence of e.g. Film Ferrania, ADOX, FilmoTec, Inovisproject can be aesily confirmed by going to these factory locations. And in most cases those companies who are active in production try also to emphasize that and show pictures or videos about the production or the factory. If you don't get any of that it can be a hint that a real own production does not exist.
Well, it is not a 100% evidence, but a hint.......
Looking at the Shanghai homepage there is at least no information about own emulsion making and coating. If they would have it, it would be at least very reasonable to present that in the current market situation.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[MattKing]

It would be perfectly reasonable if Shanghai saw a quality or consistency or even cost advantage to switch which raw film stock they are using when they supply their specialized (220, 620, 127 etc.) confectioning and distribution services.
But if they do so, they really should rebrand the product - at least slightly!
GP3-b, GP3-2, GP4?

 

[John Wiegerink]

It would be perfectly reasonable if Shanghai saw a quality or consistency or even cost advantage to switch which raw film stock they are using when they supply their specialized (220, 620, 127 etc.) confectioning and distribution services.
But if they do so, they really should rebrand the product - at least slightly!
GP3-b, GP3-2, GP4?

Matt,
I agree, and if Shanghai Jian Cheng Technologty Co., LTD really does make its own film, which I was led to believe they did at one time. I think it would be smart to let the film people in the photographic public know it's a film totally produced by them, like you suggest. By not doing just that, it leads me to believe that they might be doing the exact same thing CatLabs is doing.
My film just arrived about an hour ago, and all the batch numbers and exp. dates are the same for all 10 rolls. Exp 202306 batch 2010. The packaging suggests everything is Chinese, but who's to say for 100% sure. It's going to be doomy and gloomy for the next several days here. If it's bright enough tomorrow, I will go out and expose one roll and give it a bath in some Ilford Ilfosol3 to see what I have.

 

[redbandit]

At a higher price than Foma original film, which means the market for Kosmo and the B&W Lomography branded films rather odd.

If you pay attention, the market for Kosmo, Lomography brand, film photography project brands, Is mainly based on internet hype, instagram, and being part of a "culture" subset in photography where, lets shall we say, name brand/image created by using a name brand is more important then cost or quality.

IE the you tube videos moking people who own cameras with a Red Dot on them.

 

[John Wiegerink]

John, no problem at all, you're welcome.



Please let us know then.



It is a real "film community project", and everyone who has experience in film testing can join in. It would be very nice if you and Klaus could add your test results to the final data base!



Completely reasonable and understandable.



Real film factories with own emulsion making and coating need a certain size. I know for sure, as I have visited several film factories . And even the smallest ones have a size which cannot be "hidden" somewhere.
The existence of e.g. Film Ferrania, ADOX, FilmoTec, Inovisproject can be aesily confirmed by going to these factory locations. And in most cases those companies who are active in production try also to emphasize that and show pictures or videos about the production or the factory. If you don't get any of that it can be a hint that a real own production does not exist.
Well, it is not a 100% evidence, but a hint.......
Looking at the Shanghai homepage there is at least no information about own emulsion making and coating. If they would have it, it would be at least very reasonable to present that in the current market situation.

Best regards,
Henning

Henning,
When I used GP3 years back, I know it wasn't the same emulsion as Foma 100. Then when they stopped production, so they said, for retooling and upgrading their factory I was convinced the film was made in-house. Then it was announced that production had started back up, and we would soon have GP3 film again. I now have a bad feeling that they never retooled any emulsion making equipment and just outsourced their film making.
I don't have any Foma 100 to compared this GP3 to where I'm at right now, but when I get to my cottage I have some 4X5 sheet film from both Foma 100 and GP3 100. They should be the same if exposed and developed alike if Shanghai is just rebadging Foma 100. I'll post my results and scan the 4X5's for both films. Cost wise they are almost identical. GP3 2 boxes of 25 sheets each for $71.88 directly from China and Foma 100 50 sheets from B&H or Freestyle for $74.99

 

[Klaus_H]

I just wanted some 220 film. If it is FOMA 100 in different branding, I did pay for one roll of Shanghai GP3 220 the same price as for 3 120 rolls of FOMA 100. For the special film format (220) this price difference seems aceptable to me.
But having two different film types in boxes with the same emulsion numbers, is absolut not aceptable.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I just wanted some 220 film. If it is FOMA 100 in different branding, I did pay for one roll of Shanghai GP3 220 the same price as for 3 120 rolls of FOMA 100. For the special film format (220) this price difference seems aceptable to me.
But having two different film types in boxes with the same emulsion numbers, is absolut not aceptable.

Klaus,
Not only is it unacceptable, but down right confusing when it comes development and printing time. Unless, of course, they are the same exact film? The film I just received has a rather coarse black backing paper. What is the color of Foma 100 backing paper?

 

[Klaus_H]

The FOMA backing paper is whithe with deep black frame numbers.

I do expect Shanghai is using its own backing paper independed which material is rolled in the backing paper.

 

[John Wiegerink]

The FOMA backing paper is whithe with deep black frame numbers.

I do expect Shanghai is using its own backing paper independed which material is rolled in the backing paper.

At least the backing paper is a good sign. The rest I don't know about. I just loaded an old, but very capable Ica Icarette. I'll run out and take my eight shots and process them tomorrow afternoon.