What's interesting is that 100CN and Pro Image 100 tests the same but Lomo 120 is made in Germany, not packaged in Germany. I think under EU rules the film has to made in Germany as opposed to be finished in Germany to be called Made in.
For film there are no such EU rules, but national rules, which are rather vague.I think under EU rules the film has to made in Germany as opposed to be finished in Germany to be called Made in.
It is not a conspiracy. It is being made at Innoviscoat. On the same machinery the base material for Polaroid is being made these days.My conspiracy theory is that they're using AGFA's old equipment.
What's interesting is that 100CN and Pro Image 100 tests the same but Lomo 120 is made in Germany, not packaged in Germany. I think under EU rules the film has to made in Germany as opposed to be finished in Germany to be called Made in.
Henning Serger and I did some tests with Lomography CN100 and Kodak ProImage 100 and we came to the conclusion that they were both the same.
The test was in 35mm only.This is important news, even in 120 format?
I did a test with Lomography 400 and Ultramax 400 in August but I made a mistake.Any ideas for Lomography Color 400 ?
I did a test with Lomography 400 and Ultramax 400 in August but I made a mistake.
I have only now got around to shooting a new test and am waiting to get the films processed.
Then it's over to Henning to check the results. Hopefully, in the next few weeks.
Would be interested to learn what tests, and would they for example be able to distinguish between different iterations of the same film, pro image seems to have a lot in common with gold 200@ e.i.100 and uses a gold print profile so would in interested if you could tell these apart or say against colorplus given common ancestry.Henning Serger and I did some tests with Lomography CN100 and Kodak ProImage 100 and we came to the conclusion that they were both the same.
Henning Serger and I did some tests with Lomography CN100 and Kodak ProImage 100 and we came to the conclusion that they were both the same.
I wonder how much Kodak charges to make a master roll? If I win the big lottery would it be Panatomic X, Plus X or maybe Verichrome pan in 120 and 4X5?
Didn't Panatomic X contain cadmium? That's another reason why you won't see it back. Plus-X is only discontinued 10 years or so, so chances for that are better I would guess.I wonder how much Kodak charges to make a master roll? If I win the big lottery would it be Panatomic X, Plus X or maybe Verichrome pan in 120 and 4X5?
I doubt it - cadmium was used mostly with paper.Didn't Panatomic X contain cadmium? That's another reason why you won't see it back. Plus-X is only discontinued 10 years or so, so chances for that are better I would guess.
That is also coated by InnoviscoatAny ideas about Lomography Purple?
It had according to some posts in different fora. They wanted to get rid of the cadmium, but sales were already that low that the couldn't justify re-engineering for a emulsion without it.I doubt it - cadmium was used mostly with paper.
Both were discontinued because of low sales volumes and the consolidation of all film manufacture on to one, high volume coating line.
Thanks.That is also coated by Innoviscoat
I love this channel by the wayOkay, this is fun:
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?