Was this Rollei CR200 mislabled?

[iandvaag]

I have developed E6 several times before using the 3-bath kit with much success. Today I once again developed 6 rolls of Velvia/Provia which came out very nicely. I then processed 6 rolls of Rollei CR200 using the same procedure and another identical 3-bath kit. I have never shot this film before, but I have seen stereo slides of it from a traveling folio of which I am a member. The slides in the folio looked fine. Unfortunately, mine did not.

I have never cross-processed film before, but I suspect that is what I did today. I knew that Rollei CR200 has a reputation of a warm yellowish cast to it, but I obtained a deep orange cast -- much like the mask of colour negative film. The film was 3 months expired when I processed it today. When I bought the film, it was about 6 months before its expiration date, but I had kept it in the fridge before I shot it and I kept it in the deep freeze after I shot it, so I can't imagine the "post-expiration" effect could be this severe. The film was labelled on the canister like this, clearly indicating that it is reversal/slide film:

The rebate likewise confirms that this was CR200, not CN200:

What went wrong? I thought I got a good deal on this film, but now I know that it was false economy. Next time I'm sticking with Fuji (and Ektachrome if it makes it to medium format). This is as blue as the sky got:

 

[Slixtiesix]

I only used this film once and when it came back from the lab, I received negs instead of slides, together with an excuse note of the lab. That was not what I had expected! The negs printed okay on B/W paper, though a bit steep... This was only a test to try the film so I did not bother much about it, but never used the film again. And yes, it had been Rollei CR200, not CN200.

 

[Athiril]

CN200 has a clear base anyway iirc.

It is just a bad film to be honest with you. Sometimes its okay, sometimes not. Plus much grainier and less sharp than other films.

 

[destroya]

that looks about right. if you shoot it when its really fresh it looks ok, but wait a while and thats what you will get. avoid it and shoot some fuji to get normal results.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

The is the correct colour for this film. It is Aviphot rebranded as CR 200 and the reddish appearance is typical of aerial photography films. I am not a Lomo fan by any stretch and this colour rendition was too far "out there" for my liking, and didn't imove much in post. So I gave away 2 rolls to a friend who is a Lomo fan!

 

[AgX]

It is not typical of aerial films. That film has as stated by Agfa the original emulsion from a consumer film of the 90s (back then a well-received film).

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

I still have the printed information where it directly refences re-branding of Agfa Aviphot aerial film as CR 200, and shows the example of the pseudo-Lomo cast familiar in the opening post.

 

[iandvaag]

Thanks for the posts.

Right now my feeling is that I wish that the film was nitrate because it could be at least useful as a firestarter in that case. I guess I'll just have to open my mind to the "lomo look" and take it in stride.

 

[trendland]

Thanks for the posts.

Right now my feeling is that I wish that the film was nitrate because it could be at least useful as a firestarter in that case. I guess I'll just have to open my mind to the "lomo look" and take it in stride.

Sorry to say - but as far as I know Rollei
is not planning to return to nitrocellulose
films.
I also can imagine that they would not get
permission form officials.
Because of to much danger in regard of
avoiding burnings in labs/archives/darkrooms.
I've seen those nitro films long time ago.
If the chemical reaction is to far in advance of damage you just have a kind
of rotten something.
The danger is from the fact that it is able
to began to burn at any time.
And your example is showing that there would be indeed an other danger (from the use of the film)......



with regards

 

[Arctic amateur]

I have shot this film and gotten perfectly good color from it, so the color cast shown above is not a design feature of the film.