What actually are Lomography repackaged films?

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

I've been trying to do some digging on this, and haven't been able to get very far, but what are all of Lomographies repackaged color films?
I read that 100, 400, and 800 are repackaged Kodak gold- But Gold doesn't come in 100 or 800 speeds anymore, and does Kodak specifically do 120 rolls of gold just for Lomography?
xpro is supposedly ct precisia, which would explain why it's not available- though since I have three rolls, should I shoot it at iso 100 if I want to process it in e6?
I'm not convinced Lomochrome is a repackage.
I don't know what's used for the redscale films.
And I don't know much about what the 110s are.

And just so you don't ask, I don't have that much interest in figuring out what their black and white films are.

 

[BradS]

I do not know but it seems, to me at least, very unlikely that any of them are Kodak. It would not surprise me (but, again, I do not know) if the film stock were sourced form some obscure (to us westerners) manufacturer in one of the FSU countries.

 

[MattKing]

I would guess as well that even if you were to know what the source for the various films is currently, it could very well be different three months from now.

 

[Toasty]

Its possible it's still Kodak stock (the 100/400/800 color neg). It may not be viable to re-introduce, produce and market these older emulsions at a Kodak level, they could make Lomography some master rolls every so often and be done with it.

 

[MattKing]

Eastman Kodak is like Harman, they offer contract coating.
I doubt they offer contract coating of currently sold as Kodak Alaris photographic film (other than to Kodak Alaris) but they may be open and able to sell older versions of films to third parties.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

The typical answer to these threads is that the emulsion isn't a current product sold by the master company (Kodak or Harmon). With both of the mystery films out there right now (Lomography and Ultrafine), neither company strikes me as having a strong enough interest in or financial backing to truly develop their own emulsions, so I think the product must be something pulled from the recipes of their suppliers. Especially considering they are on the bottom end of the market.

I know this is a Lomography thread not an Ultrafine one, but I recently called Ultrafine and they told me their ultrafine xtreme emulsions were "not sold by anyone else out there." I guess all that means is that they aren't FP4 and HP5+ as some people say. But it still doesn't rule out some other, similar film recipe developed by Ilford and pulled out of the old recipe book.

I really doubt the Lomography films are from soviet bloc countries. They just look way too much like Kodak.

 

[Ste_S]

I do not know but it seems, to me at least, very unlikely that any of them are Kodak. It would not surprise me (but, again, I do not know) if the film stock were sourced form some obscure (to us westerners) manufacturer in one of the FSU countries.

Keep in mind there's only two companies making C41 currently - Kodak and Fuji, and the Lomo stuff is certainly more Kodak colours than Fuji.
It's been speculated before it's the Kodacolor VR emulsion (same as Colorplus), the stuff that Kodak puts into it's disposable cameras.

 

[BradS]

Keep in mind there's only two companies making C41 currently - Kodak and Fuji, and the Lomo stuff is certainly more Kodak colours than Fuji.
It's been speculated before it's the Kodacolor VR emulsion (same as Colorplus), the stuff that Kodak puts into it's disposable cameras.

Hmmm, interesting. Thanks for the info. I remember kinda liking Kodacolor VR...Now, I will have to try some Kodak Color Plus.

 

[MattKing]

I'd be surprised if it is Color Plus - I think Kodak Alaris probably has the rights to use that.

 

[Ste_S]

I'd be surprised if it is Color Plus - I think Kodak Alaris probably has the rights to use that.

Kodacolor VR was available in 100, 200, 400 & 1000ISO.
Lomo CN is available in 100,400 & 800ISO. Not however 200ISO, make of that what you will.

 

[Arcadia4]

Yes a remarkable co-incidence. Kodak have previously confirmed Colorplus is a VR based film

Lomo 100 in 135 comes in kodak film containers and labelled 'made in USA' if that wasnt a big enough clue though its been suggested that the 120 may be finished in china.

 

[dutchsteammachine]

maybe its stock from kodak that was deemed too low in quality to be sold under the Kodak label.

The point of lomography is to be surprised, consistency is likely their lowest point of intrest.

 

[cmacd123]

Kodak (recently) made a 800 speed film for use exclusively in their one time use cameras. it is not too big a strech to imagine them selling some under a private label arrangement, and their is no reason why alaris could not be the contractor..

I have no idea. ONE of the lomo 25mm B&W films I did get a roll of a few years back DID come in a Kodak Can and have the film attched to the spool the same way that Kodak Film is packed.

 

[Wallendo]

The LomoChrome print films are "Made in the EU" and are like no other films, the film base colors are very different. They appear to be contract coating by a European manufacturer capable of making color films. I assume Innoviscoat is a likely suspect.
Lomography and Kodak did have some joint efforts in the past.
Redscale is just backward loaded standard print film.

On the unrelated topic of UltraFine Xtreme, the film looks a lot like Kentmere. I know that under previous management, Harman didn't sell any of it's films under other labels, but I have always wondered how different a film has to be to be a different film. If you just add a little of an inert ingredient to a Harman film, is it now a unique film?

 

[Arcadia4]

Lomo xpro film is Agfa-gevaert aviphot chrome, essentially same emulsion as agfa rsx 200. Made obsolete with the switch to colour digital surveys. No longer in production and older stock now has a yellow cast, Also sold as rollei CR200/crossbird. Yes a different look compared to fuji or kodak.

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

I have checked Lomochrome and some 110 boxes recently, and they say made in china. I haven't tried any of their standard color negatives so I can't say for sure.

Definitely some interesting observations from all of you.

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

Keep in mind there's only two companies making C41 currently - Kodak and Fuji, and the Lomo stuff is certainly more Kodak colours than Fuji.
It's been speculated before it's the Kodacolor VR emulsion (same as Colorplus), the stuff that Kodak puts into it's disposable cameras.

Svema still seems to be making color film- but There's no information and only one emulsion can be bought recanned https://filmphotographystore.com/collections/svema-film/products/35mm-color-svema-125-1-roll

 

[thuggins]

Lomo xpro film is Agfa-gevaert aviphot chrome, essentially same emulsion as agfa rsx 200. Made obsolete with the switch to colour digital surveys. No longer in production and older stock now has a yellow cast, Also sold as rollei CR200/crossbird. Yes a different look compared to fuji or kodak.

Xpro and crossbird are not the same film. One would be hard pressed to find two films that look more different from each other. The Lomo is very yellow. I have tried various filters to try to tone it down. Xpro and rerachrome are most likely the same stuff. They both have the strong yellow cast.

 

[koraks]

The LomoChrome print films are "Made in the EU"

As far as I'm aware, you could buy a master roll of film from let's say China, confection it into 35mm/120 rolls in Germany and legally label it as "Made in the EU".

 

[AgX]

The LomoChrome print films are "Made in the EU" and are like no other films, the film base colors are very different. They appear to be contract coating by a European manufacturer capable of making color films. I assume Innoviscoat is a likely suspect.

-) "Made in Europe" is a vague term
-) There are only two manufacturers left in Europe capable of making colour film, Agfa and Inoviscoat.
But you overlook the costs involved in tollproducing such, unless doing a re-run of an own product.

-) with "film base colours" you likely mean the mask, which is not a part of the base.

 

[AgX]

Svema still seems to be making color film- but There's no information and only one emulsion can be bought recanned https://filmphotographystore.com/collections/svema-film/products/35mm-color-svema-125-1-roll

The Svema plant is in ruins since many years.

 

[abruzzi]

The Svema plant is in ruins since many years.

My understanding is that Astrum in the Ukraine is making films using the Svema equipment and recipes, but having never seen it, I don't know if its sold under the Svema name or the Astrum name or some other name:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrum

 

[AgX]

Astrum is a dealer.

 

[pentaxuser]

I know this is a Lomography thread not an Ultrafine one, but I recently called Ultrafine and they told me their ultrafine xtreme emulsions were "not sold by anyone else out there." I guess all that means is that they aren't FP4 and HP5+ as some people say. But it still doesn't rule out some other, similar film recipe developed by Ilford and pulled out of the old recipe book.

.

I imagine you were not in a position to question Ultrafine further in the way that a court of inquiry, congressional committee or in the U.K. a parliamentary committee can do in order to establish exactly what the Ultrafine definition meant otherwise you'd have said how they replied to further questions? . If they are telling the truth that their films aren't Kentmere, any other Ilford film or indeed anyone else's film simply re-badged then it suggests that for their statement to be true Ultrafine has indeed asked, say, Ilford/Pemberstone for example to do something to the ingredients that may change nothing that can be measured but renders Ultrafine's statement true

A lot seems to depend these days on the definition of the word "truth". Matt King was unable to get anything resembling what I would regard as the truth from Pemberstone about rebadging and for my part I have made a similar inquiry of Pemberstone in a way that only an unequivocal answer was possible. Needless to say I got an equally vague answer that told me nothing but did help me to decide that in terms of the films that were allegedly Kentmere the only sensible action was to buy on price as the only real distinguishing feature.

pentaxuser

 

[Arcadia4]

There is no evidence that Astrum has any coating capability, but may have conversion capability and appears to sell repackaged Agfa-Gevaert, Kodak and Tasma Aerial survey films mostly under the Svema brand.
There is a discussion about it here - https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129401&page=2

Its said their colour film is an old Kodak aerial film, particularly as its C-41 (Svema used the Agfa process). In reality there are limited possibilities now for 'normal' colour films given the cost, complexity and volume of production needed that is not Fuji or Kodak mainstream or contract production, given the demise of Ferrania, Agfa photo and Konica. Agfa-gevaert has ceased colour aerial film production so this leaves outdated stocks of Agfa-gevaert and Kodak aerial films as one of the few remaining sources of alternative stock, plus the odd random Ferrania master roll (Lomo F2)

Lomography do have conversion and packaging undertaken in China for some of their films, mainly 110 and 120 format. Their B&W films are currently Fomapan, but they used to be Kodak Tmax.