• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

So what IS this lomo 400 film?

keenmaster486 said:
We went through this before and I think we decided it's rebranded Kodak stock of some kind, probably the cheap consumer stuff...
Click to expand...
Yes, I recall we both discussed in a thread the topic.

I now have some results from it (scanned though). It is Kodacolor family, consumer type. Grainy and has an older look to it compared to Portra or Ektar (the latter is very punchy, if something is to be said).
 
Yes... But what about the 100 speed stuff?

I've shot some Lomo CN 100 and it definitely has a consumer grade look to it, not sure whether my stock was Kodak or Fuji or something else though cause it was a few years ago.
 
Hmm...I wonder which Kodak...would it be something still available or do they only rebrand stuff that's discontinued or something?
 
Kodak Gold or Ultramax?

Gold/Ultramax only refers to speed right? So you have Gold 100/200 and Ultramax 400... right? EDIT: Wait, there's also Gold 400... what is the difference between Gold and Ultramax?

But then you have Lomography CN 800 as well. There isn't any Kodak brand consumer grade 800 speed film. It would have to be Fuji or something else.
 
I'm not sure what it is, but I recently shot a roll at ISO 100 by mistake, and the results were great!
 
Ultramax is the latest name for Gold. It's just a name and Kodak itself must have a product number instead. The iterations were marked in the edges as GC and 7 was the latest generation IIRC. Then the family is supposedly Kodacolor VR, or was in the 80s. But the current Lomo Kodacolor is not of course the same Kodacolor as 1980.

It's very plausible for all 100, 400 and 800 to be Kodak. Lomography is a big client and can do a contract coating of a Master roll. That through Kodak Alaris, a few years ago there was an announcement of their partnership.
PS: Kodak had Gold 100 and MAX 800 until 2013? There's also Some "pro" labelled Kodak film in select markets at ISO 100. Easily available for private labelling, perhaps Kodak itself doesn't want to market themselves.

Both the 100 and 400 are rather grainy (Compared to Portra and Ektar, but even Superia to my eyes), rather comparable to Fuji C200. Kodak Color Plus is another consumer product that is comparable.

Until a few years ago, Lomo CN was Ferrania and finished by Foma (120 had the same green-white-black backing paper signature). This single run of aged film was from that time. Nowadays Kodak coated and finished in 35mm "made in USA", to make matters funnier, the 120 says "made in China" - that could just be the finishing part of it as there are complaints on its strange backing paper. I still have to try it.
Downrating Color Negative is rather common practice and can be beneficial in some situations.
 
I'm a Lomography dealer. I can ask my account rep. I may or may not get an answer, but it won't hurt to ask. All I know is that the CN100 and 400 sells like gang busters.
 
rpavich said:
Thanks! I just made another wet 8x10 and it's great looking!
Click to expand...

From the account rep: It's not old discontinued film, but it is supplied to them fresh from a manufacturer, though which manufacturer was not divulged. If others think it's kodak from the look, then that's probably what it is, though actual confirmation of that was not forthcoming.
 
the 100 ISO could be kodak colorplus 200 which I always expose at 100 with great results
 
I just saw that these films are also available in 120 format. At the present time kodak doesn't produce any consumer grade film in this format, so it is definitely a special run made by kodak for lomography. The 100 ISO in 120 size is not available in this moment, don't know if this means that is discontinued or they're expecting a new batch.
 
keenmaster486 said:
I believe the negatives actually say "lomography" on them.
Click to expand...

You can usually tell by the ... "font" of the imprint, fuji and Kodak have different styles, that helps if you compare them you can usually figure it out.
 
that bar code is very similar to kodak gold 200, I don't have any ultramax 400 in hand so I can't say for sure, but I believe they would match
 
Berri said:
that bar code is very similar to kodak gold 200, I don't have any ultramax 400 in hand so I can't say for sure, but I believe they would match
Click to expand...
It certainly looks like it. Or Kodak Gold 400. The edge markings look the same to me.

Here is a sample from a flickr search for both. The 200 is the first image.

So if it is....then what does that mean? That I'm actually buying Kodak Gold?







 
I just developed one roll and was quite underexposed, It's only me? or everyone has the same problem?
*Underexposed a full stop, same camera, lens and developer that I always use (F100~24-120D)
 
Last edited:
filmconquistador said:
I just developed one roll and was quite underexposed, It's only me? or everyone has the same problem?
*Underexposed a full stop, same camera, lens and developer that I always use (F100~24-120D)
Click to expand...
What do the negs look like? I shot mine at either 250 or 320 I can't remember but I try and keep things a little bit on the over exposure side and rarely shoot 400 film at 400.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register