Your opinion on the results of this film.

[mohmad khatab]

We are not here to try to find out the true identity of this film.
This does not concern us at all.
Whether the movie was originally Kodak or Agfa or (orwo) this is not important, even if it was produced by the accursed Satan, this does not concern us.
- I want your technical opinion on the results of the tests for this film.
Scientific Technical Opinion.
Photo details, colors, etc.
Is it really worth $ 6 from your point of view?

 

[Donald Qualls]

Looks like a very acceptable color film. Hard to say more (sharpness etc.) with small scans, and I don't apparently have a very good eye for color (which can be difficult to impossible to judge on a web browser, anyway). At $6 a roll, it's cost competitive with other quality color films in 35 mm.

Last time I actually bought color negative film was 2005, and that was Fuji Superia Xtra 400; for the scenes shown, this seems similarly good.

 

[Eric Rose]

I like it. Maybe a bit sensitive to dark shadows but the image with the sheep is well recorded.

 

[mohmad khatab]

Looks like a very acceptable color film. Hard to say more (sharpness etc.) with small scans, and I don't apparently have a very good eye for color (which can be difficult to impossible to judge on a web browser, anyway). At $6 a roll, it's cost competitive with other quality color films in 35 mm.

Last time I actually bought color negative film was 2005, and that was Fuji Superia Xtra 400; for the scenes shown, this seems similarly good.

I am really happy, your opinion is very optimistic, encouraging and logical.
We are in the process of making a deal of at least 500 rolls and we may get a discount.
Lord protects you
thank you very much

 

[mohmad khatab]

I like it. Maybe a bit sensitive to dark shadows but the image with the sheep is well recorded.

Thank you, Mr. Eric
I received information that it is primarily an aerial film
thank you very much

 

[Sirius Glass]

I am impressed with the color. I would use this film.

 

[pentaxuser]

Looks good to me, mohmad. Skin colour looks fine which is most important and the colours look neutral. That is to say not falsely saturated

Is this a 36 frame film? If it is then by today's prices $6 per roll looks to be good value

pentaxuser

 

[mohmad khatab]

I am impressed with the color. I would use this film.

00380544971710 This is the phone number of Mr. Dimitri of Ukraine
He is a very nice and friendly man.
,, Call him and he will send you what you want immediately.
- Tell him, you got his number by Muhammad from Egypt.

 

[mohmad khatab]

Looks good to me, mohmad. Skin colour looks fine which is most important and the colours look neutral. That is to say not falsely saturated

Is this a 36 frame film? If it is then by today's prices $6 per roll looks to be good value

pentaxuser

Yes brother 36 frame

 

[voceumana]

Most of the frames seem to be typical for color films, but the portrait of the young girl is excellent--if its appearance is particular to this film, then I'd find it very good.. I don't see any flaws in the film.

Note: edited to add "typical" which I missed in originally posting.

 

[AndyH]

It's a very subtle color palette, even in sunlight with the brighter colored subjects. Grain is good, and I like the way the underexposed shadows don't go to a greenish tint, as some old-time chrome films used to do. Might not be my first choice for every subject, but it's a very usable film for many. Especially at that price.

Andy

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Reminds me of Kodak Portra film. It's made to reproduce skin tones. It's palette is not oversaturated and plain. I think the shot of the girl is great. She's very beautiful and if your daughter, you are a very lucky man.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Appears to be a decent film. What you might want to find out from Dmitriy is whether these pics are from normal C41 processing of aerial film or some other process.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

I think the shot of the girl is great. She's very beautiful and if your daughter, you are a very lucky man.

+1 though it's not exactly clear whether the picture is from recent times or from distant past.

 

[Lachlan Young]

So is it repackaged Kodak Aerocolor or Agfa Aviphot unmasked neg stock?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Nice looking film, I'd say.

 

[koraks]

Yes, looks just fine, and suited for skin tones. Colors in these images are rather warm and yellowish and I'd have to make a few prints of it to see how well the color rendition is suited to other subject matter such as foliage or saturated primary colors; I suspect that is probably not the strongest point of this film. Contrast seems fairly high with moderate saturation. Overall it reminds me a lot of Kodak ProImage 100 which retails at between $5 and $9 depending on where you shop.

 

[mohmad khatab]

Most of the frames seem to be for color films, but the portrait of the young girl is excellent--if its appearance is particular to this film, then I'd find it very good.. I don't see any flaws in the film.

thank you brother

It's a very subtle color palette, even in sunlight with the brighter colored subjects. Grain is good, and I like the way the underexposed shadows don't go to a greenish tint, as some old-time chrome films used to do. Might not be my first choice for every subject, but it's a very usable film for many. Especially at that price.

Andy

I agree with you a lot
But I would like to test this emulsion with industrial lighting and evening photography, next week

Reminds me of Kodak Portra film. It's made to reproduce skin tones. It's palette is not oversaturated and plain. I think the shot of the girl is great. She's very beautiful and if your daughter, you are a very lucky man.

Thank you for your great participation.
God bless you

Appears to be a decent film. What you might want to find out from Dmitriy is whether these pics are from normal C41 processing of aerial film or some other process.

Yes - this movie is primarily intended as an aerial film and is supposed to be developed according to process (AN-6) - I actually have no information about that process, so it was developed according to process (C41).
Actually, I know what will the reaction of this film be if it is developed according to the process (AN-6)? I really do not know

+1 though it's not exactly clear whether the picture is from recent times or from distant past.

Thank you for your great participation
Greetings to you

So is it repackaged Kodak Aerocolor or Agfa Aviphot unmasked neg stock?

I am no longer interested in verifying the truth about this product, I have the same.
We have a product now in our hands, we do not care who is the one who invented it, and we do not care about the one who encapsulated it, let us assume that it is a movie produced by the accursed Satan factory on Jupiter, and he wanted to market this product on the planet, what can we say ? Are we to reject the Devil's products as being an unknown product and whose history is mysterious and unknown?
Some imaging experts have seen the results of this film and said that these colors do not look like the imprint of Kodak in any way and that this film is very close to the usual color imprint with (ORWO) films or dry -
And some experts said that it is a movie that is very close to being a Kodak film.
All of this controversy will be of no use at this time (I think).

Nice looking film, I'd say.

thank you very much
Greetings to you

Yes, looks just fine, and suited for skin tones. Colors in these images are rather warm and yellowish and I'd have to make a few prints of it to see how well the color rendition is suited to other subject matter such as foliage or saturated primary colors; I suspect that is probably not the strongest point of this film. Contrast seems fairly high with moderate saturation. Overall it reminds me a lot of Kodak ProImage 100 which retails at between $5 and $9 depending on where you shop.

This movie will be sold in Egypt. And it should be at a fair price.
The advertised price is
We strive to buy it for $ 4, so that after shipping costs, etc. it reaches $ 4.5 or $ 5, max.
We seek to provide a very acceptable movie at a very fair price (rather cheap), all to support the Egyptian hobbyist.
- Some of the youths got Kodak Vision P-rollers and packed some rolls and sold them to the amateurs.
We encourage this as well
As I said earlier
Some imaging experts watched the results of this film and said that these colors never look like the Kodak imprint in any way and that this film is very close to the usual color imprint with (ORWO) films or dry -
And some experts said that it is a movie that is very close to being a Kodak movie.
All of this controversy will be of no use at this time (I think).
- Yes, your idea is very excellent, dear.
You are a very respectable man
God bless you .

 

[Bikerider]

From what you have shown here it is perfectly acceptable. However at $6 a roll it is compared to UK prices a bit more expensive We can still get Fuji 200 and Kodak 200 at under £4. I have not considered any colour casts as these can generally be filtered to be neutral (although I could not see any). In harsh sunlight, yes the shadows are dense but that is what I would expect. Looking at the lady drinking from the bottle where the light is not so severe it is fine. Even the ones with the two (Lovely) ladies lying on their backs is perfectly acceptable with plenty of punch to the image.
From such small images I cannot say about the grain which with scans will be more prominent than darkroom prints, especially with high end dedicated film scanners. Flatbeds are more forgiving in that respect.
With the packet having Russian cyrillic characters I am assuming it comes from somewhere like Ukraine as legally you should not be able to by Russian because of the trade ban.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

This movie will be sold in Egypt. And it should be at a fair price.

You're doing a great service to the film photography enthusiasts community in Egypt. I'm sure they'll love this wonderful gift that you're going to give them. Wishing you success in negotiating a good price from Astrum for this film.

 

[mohmad khatab]

From what you have shown here it is perfectly acceptable. However at $6 a roll it is compared to UK prices a bit more expensive We can still get Fuji 200 and Kodak 200 at under £4. I have not considered any colour casts as these can generally be filtered to be neutral (although I could not see any). In harsh sunlight, yes the shadows are dense but that is what I would expect. Looking at the lady drinking from the bottle where the light is not so severe it is fine. Even the ones with the two (Lovely) ladies lying on their backs is perfectly acceptable with plenty of punch to the image.
From such small images I cannot say about the grain which with scans will be more prominent than darkroom prints, especially with high end dedicated film scanners. Flatbeds are more forgiving in that respect.
With the packet having Russian cyrillic characters I am assuming it comes from somewhere like Ukraine as legally you should not be able to by Russian because of the trade ban.

- Ukraine or Russia, there is no ban of any kind on them, what do you say?
The price is in dollars, not in pounds or euros.

 

[dE fENDER]

Please note, that box and packaging on the last photo is not from this film, it is from b/w negative and there are label in Ukrainian on it. The correct package for this color film is:

https://sreda.photo/product-images/astrum_color_negative-1.png

 

[Lachlan Young]

Please note, that box and packaging on the last photo is not from this film, it is from b/w negative and there are label in Ukrainian on it. The correct package for this color film is:

https://sreda.photo/product-images/astrum_color_negative-1.png

That's strongly suggestive that it's repackaged Kodak Aerocolor maskless neg film. The real speed is going to probably be a stop slower than the EAFS and shadow colour reproduction will be poorer than any masked neg film.

 

[halfaman]

I like this film too. Seems more neutral than cheap Kodak and Fuji films, I will give it a try.

Only for 35 mm?

 

[macfred]

Only for 35 mm?

Yes, 120 would be nice !