Lomography color negative 100 film is now available in 120 size! good, I'll buy some!
Of course, it probably is a different film!Lomography color negative 100 film is now available in 120 size! good, I'll buy some!
There is no way of knowing that if you don't try it. They could have it made to order by InovisCoat or kodak, for example. In this case the film would be the same as before. Where do you think they "find" Lomochrome each time it runs out? Someone must produce it for them.Of course, it probably is a different film!
I should have put a "smiley" emoticon beside my earlier post.There is no way of knowing that if you don't try it. They could have it made to order by InovisCoat or kodak, for example. In this case the film would be the same as before. Where do you think they "find" Lomochrome each time it runs out? Someone must produce it for them.
There is no way it is ektar! Nobody thinks that! But I don't see how it can't be gold or Kodacolor. Anyway I believe it is more likely produced by inovis coat.I should have put a "smiley" emoticon beside my earlier post.
But more specifically, I would be surprised if Eastman Kodak would contract coat something similar to Ektar 100 for Lomography, as that is the only 120 colour film they make at that sensitivity, and it seems to be designed and marketed towards the "premium" side of the market.
The Gold 100 emulsions would have to be substantially reformulated to make them usable with the 120 film substrate.
Films have to go through some fairly extensive re-design work if you intend to change the support material from the thicker base material used for 135 to the thinner material used for 120.But I don't see how it can't be gold or Kodacolor.
I don't see how this would matter much on a lomo film...Kodak would do all sorts of reserch if their brand name was on the film but this is not the case and you don't expect pro quality anyway from a lomo filmFilms have to go through some fairly extensive re-design work if you intend to change the support material from the thicker base material used for 135 to the thinner material used for 120.
I think it is more a case of Kodak not being willing to spend the money to do the research. You have to do that research, because otherwise you have problems with things like making sure the emulsion actually stays on the film backing!I don't see how this would matter much on a lomo film...Kodak would do all sorts of reserch if their brand name was on the film but this is not the case and you don't expect pro quality anyway from a lomo film
I found this http://goods.ruten.com.tw/item/show?21103173894559 perhaps this is what agfa vista 200 really is...
Let me put it this way, who did this research to produce lomochrome purple in 135 and 120 size? It is a fact that Lomography negative film is being produced from scratch, how else they could have theyr name on the film rebate if it was some old expired emulsion?I think it is more a case of Kodak not being willing to spend the money to do the research. You have to do that research, because otherwise you have problems with things like making sure the emulsion actually stays on the film backing!
Are you realy sure ?Mitsubishi MX200, Samsung Prime Color 200 and Sakura Pro 200 all are Ferrania Solaris 200 based.
Something I hadn't thought about.Films have to go through some fairly extensive re-design work if you intend to change the support material from the thicker base material used for 135 to the thinner material used for 120.
And of course there are the serious wrapper offset problems that Kodak has been struggling with when it comes to 120 - apparently with both black and white and colour emulsions.
Ilford cuts both Delta 3200 135 and 120 formats from the same master roll with "thicker" 0,125mm/5mil support, which is used for 135 only by other manufacturers. Even if they use a customized spool with thinner core, which can be easily outsourced unlike backing paper, I see no reason why Lomography could not do the same.Films have to go through some fairly extensive re-design work if you intend to change the support material from the thicker base material used for 135 to the thinner material used for 120.
Thanks - I wasn't aware of that about Delta 3200.Ilford cuts both Delta 3200 135 and 120 formats from the same master roll with "thicker" 0,125mm/5mil support, which is used for 135 only by other manufacturers. Even if they use a customized spool with thinner core, which can be easily outsourced unlike backing paper, I see no reason why Lomography could not do the same.
This lomo 400 film you suspect as Kodak
gold is indeed an older Kodak emmulsion.
It is Kodak VR 400.
I believe Kodak VR is now called colorplus and it is sold here in europe as the cheapest kodak film. it comes only in 200ISO speed and 35mm. There is no mention of this film on alaris website, but in a recent interview (made by emulsive, if I remember right) kodak's spokesman confirms that this film is indeed the cheapest kodak emulsion and available only in some part of the world. Kodak produce for sure a 400 and 800 iso VR film to, and it goes in their disposable cameras only.From post #35
Having shot some 35mm of this film in the past, and became curious reading this post again today, so sat down and decided to give it a scan whorl with the SilverFast program used for scanning film.
In this program you can select film type and speed, from various manufactures, or create your own.
So tried Kodak Gold, and a couple of others mentioned, and then selected Kodak Vr, 200... which gave the best results, really right on compared to the others. So, .. do believe it is Kodak VR 400!
From post #35
Yes I think so : VR 400 because of the
fact that Lomo rated this as 400.
And in regard to the markings in the
original scan - the scan of the negative
with markings.
I am absolute not familiar with scans.
Sure I know Silverfast - but that was it.
If I need scans I got it from a specialist
with this hasselblatt imacon drum scanner.
Never worry about what software he uses. Scans are allways excellent to my oppinion.
But doubt software failure in your case with silverfast.
If the software do work in the best way
by using "VR 200" to VR 400.
Blame on Silverfast !!!
with regards
Having shot some 35mm of this film in the past, and became curious reading this post again today, so sat down and decided to give it a scan whorl with the SilverFast program used for scanning film.
In this program you can select film type and speed, from various manufactures, or create your own.
So tried Kodak Gold, and a couple of others mentioned, and then selected Kodak Vr, 200... which gave the best results, really right on compared to the others. So, .. do believe it is Kodak VR 400!
I think is kodak consumer 800 film, the same used in disposable cameras. They must order in large quantities to kodak and cut it down (or have them to do it)I just got some 800 speed Lomo CN film.
The box is labeled "Made in USA". When I get some developed, I'll post pics of the edge codes and markings.
Wait, it's my browser...maybe. I had a look again on my smartphone and it was available...don't know, with firefox it says is not available.Sold out already!
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?