Shot Lucky C200 New Color Film

[LomoSnap]

Due to insufficient production capacity and supply, I was very "lucky" to get a roll of the newly released Lucky Color Film. Now, I'm sharing some of the photos I took, hoping to see what everyone thinks.

I only work in the darkroom, so I don't scan the negative film. These photos were enlarged using Kodak Premier Digital Paper and scanned and uploaded using an Epson scanner calibrated with IT8.

I think this is a roll of film with very "normal" color (compared to ORWO/phoenix), at least, it can be used for daily use! Although it has some problems, the contrast is high, the highlights are a little red (I used Pre-Flash to correct it when enlarging, and by the way, the contrast is not so strong)
The emulsion defects are all over the film, and dense dot marks can be seen everywhere. I really want to know what caused it, maybe the debubbling was not done well when the emulsion was coated?

However, I admire Lucky's courage to produce a color film again in 2025. It would be better if he could be cheaper later. Now it sells for about 59RMB (~8.2USD), This is not cheap. At the same price, Kodak Gold has better quality and more stable supply.

 

[blee1996]

Thank you for sharing your real world experience. This does look quite promising, once they sort out the production quality.

 

[pentaxuser]

I only work in the darkroom, so I don't scan the negative film. These photos were enlarged using Kodak Premier Digital Paper and scanned and uploaded using an Epson scanner calibrated with IT8.


View attachment 403956 View attachment 403957 View attachment 403958 View attachment 403959 View attachment 403960 View attachment 403961 View attachment 403962 View attachment 403963 View attachment 403964

Can you explain what you do to produce these pictures for us when you say "These photos were enlarged using Kodak Premier Digital paper?

I think you mean that you enlarge the negative on a scanner then print on Premier Digital paper. You don't use darkroom paper under the negative in an enlarger and then print using RA4 ?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[koraks]

Thank you for sharing your real world experience.

Absolutely, totally great @LomoSnap ! Thanks so much for sharing these. Congrats on the prints; they look very good to me. Well done indeed. This looks like a pretty mature CN film, quite similar to consumer CN film that was sold by the thousands in drugstores and convenience stores in the 1990s.

I like that detail; I used to have something like that in my previous darkroom. It becomes second nature at some point, but it's still nice to have a reference like this. And it works well for you, too, judging by the pleasing color balance you realized on those prints.

The emulsion defects are all over the film, and dense dot marks can be seen everywhere.

Yet, your prints look relatively clean. I see some small spots here and there - is that what you're referring to? The photo of the curved negative shows what looks like some debris; usually this is the result of particles clinging to the film during fixing, washing or drying.
The only clear defects I can see that are really inherent to the film are these little colored spots:

I would explain these as minor problems in emulsification and/or filtration. Color emulsions are a bit tricky in that the color couplers are oil-like and the gelatin emulsion is water-based, so making an emulsion like this one much like mixing oil and water. We saw similar things in Harman Phoenix.

You don't use darkroom paper under the negative in an enlarger and then print using RA4 ?

Yes, that's what he did. The paper is just called "Premier Digital". All RA4 papers presently in production are 'digital' papers. They can still be used for optical enlargements.

 

[MattKing]

Can you explain what you do to produce these pictures for us when you say "These photos were enlarged using Kodak Premier Digital paper?

I think you mean that you enlarge the negative on a scanner then print on Premier Digital paper. You don't use darkroom paper under the negative in an enlarger and then print using RA4 ?

Thanks

pentaxuser

Just as Harman makes black and white paper designed for digital exposure and machine (chemical) development, I expect that the remaining bits of Chinese production of Kodak branded RA4 paper included paper designed for digital exposure.
Those digital exposure silver halide papers are aimed at the part of the photofinishing industry that still uses high volume machines and chemical development, rather than coloured ink.

 

[LomoSnap]

I like that detail; I used to have something like that in my previous darkroom. It becomes second nature at some point, but it's still nice to have a reference like this. And it works well for you, too, judging by the pleasing color balance you realized on those prints.

I have this color wheel because I still have a Philips PCS 2000 additive color enlarger in my darkroom and I need to remind myself of the additive/subtractive color process.

Yet, your prints look relatively clean. I see some small spots here and there - is that what you're referring to? The photo of the curved negative shows what looks like some debris; usually this is the result of particles clinging to the film during fixing, washing or drying.
The only clear defects I can see that are really inherent to the film are these little colored spots:

Yes, I blew it up to 8x10" and it's hard to see the emulsion spots without looking closely. But it's definitely in the emulsion, not the process or drying process, I can see the same spots on the unprocessed film.

Can you explain what you do to produce these pictures for us when you say "These photos were enlarged using Kodak Premier Digital paper?

I make contect sheet prints of the negative film, and then I selected the photos and enlarged them individually. The enlarged paper I used was called "Kodak Premier Digital paper".
Finally, I used Epson 10000xl to scan these papers for sharing on the Internet.

I expect that the remaining bits of Chinese production of Kodak branded RA4 paper included paper designed for digital exposure.

Yes, the Chinese Kodak paper produced by Lucky is all optimized for digital, not so good for darkroom use but usable. I can feel that the color perception in the filter adjustment is different from my experience and expectations of using the original Kodak paper.

I got the news from the sales agent before Sinopromise closed down, and stocked up some original Premier Digital Paper and ENDURA Paper. These photos were made using the original Premier Digital Paper.

 

[Agulliver]

Thank you for sharing these. Looks very promising and much closer to a "normal" or mature C41 film than anything currently not coming out of Kodak's factory. As for price, I think the days of truly cheap film are long gone and we all need to accept that.

 

[BMbikerider]

The colours look nice, bright and vibrant how much was a cassette compared to Kodak/Fuii

 

[LomoSnap]

The colours look nice, bright and vibrant how much was a cassette compared to Kodak/Fuii

Now it sells for about 59RMB (~8.2USD), The official channel says it includes basic developing and scanning costs (about 13RMB (~2USD) Yes, in China, film processing services are generally very cheap). But the quality often leaves something to be desired.

My point is that if it sells the film without processing and scanning, and the price is around 40RMB (~5.5USD), it might be a reasonable price. If it is more expensive, Kodak Gold is a better choice.

 

[BMbikerider]

I have not seen any for sale in UK yet but may be worth a trial.

I have just had a look at one dealer site in UK and they have Lucky black and white in 35mm, Also Shanghai 400 colour negative film in both 35mm and bulk rolls for reloading 35mm cassettes. Perhaps we me get some 'lucky' 35mm colour in the near future

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks all for the explanation. It was the phrase digital paper that confused me and made me wonder if this was a non darkroom paper

I also like the look of this film and as the OP says if it becomes available at less that Kodak Gold's price it looks like a winner

pentaxuser