BetterPhoto Q&A
Category: Camera Film

New Kodak Film

To love this question, log in above
June 26, 2003

To love this comment, log in above
June 26, 2003

However, I wouldn't think of using it for a wedding. Not only is it too saturated, it's also contrastier, not to mention the grain. White dresses would get blown out, black tuxes would look like caverns and enlarging anything would prove to be a challenge. My recommendation is the same as Doug's regarding weddings: Kodak Portra. My clear favorite among the entire line of Portra is 160 NC.

To love this comment, log in above
June 26, 2003

http://wwwuk.kodak.com/UK/en/consumer/highDefinition/?type=35mmFilmHD

I've ordered a roll to try it out.

To love this comment, log in above
July 01, 2003

The PDF data sheets for the U.S. ISO 400 High Definition and Kodak Royal Gold 400 are identical except for a name change and deletion of reciprocity failure data from the High Definition 400 data sheet.

This is not the first time Kodak has changed the name on a consumer film and marketed it in a manner that leads consumers into concluding it's something new. Note that their packaging and advertising does not actually state that it's a new film . . . but it does everything else a company would do to introduce a new product. A year or so ago, Kodak did the same thing with their family of Kodak Gold films. What used to be Kodak Gold 100 is now called "Bright Sun" and Kodak Gold 200 is now called "Bright Sun & Flash."

-- John

To love this comment, log in above
July 01, 2003

I've just picked up a 500mm mirror lens on eBay and was looking for a high-speed film to try with it. As I said above, totally conflicting opinions on the web so in the end I've ordered one each of HD200, Gold 200, and Fuji Superia 400 to see which I like the best. HD will have to be really special though to justify the extra expense.

To love this comment, log in above
July 01, 2003

There are a couple of bottom end pro films sold primarily in 3rd World regions that are actually Kodak Gold 100; places where refrigerated storage is unlikely and the true pro films are not economically marketable. Not available in the U.S., but if one pokes around Kodak's on-line data sheet library, the data for them are there.

Most of the old Gold line is still around, albeit with different names again. Gold 400 became Kodak Max and Gold 800 became Kodak Max Zoom in the U.S. followed by the 100 and 200 renaming as posted before.

The premium Royal Gold line has been broken up. Royal Gold 25 was identical to Ektar 25, a pro film. It was discontinued a number of years ago upsetting its users considerably (albeit they were small in number). It still holds the record for being unquestionably the highest resolution color negative film ever made. Royal Gold 100 recently disappeared here without much fanfare (much to my disappointment). Same happened to Royal Gold 1000. ISO 200 and 400 are all that was left and are being resurrected as "High Definition" in an apparent attempt to boost their sales. Time will tell whether or not they sustain an increase.

A Cynical Aside:
Kodak seems to believe nobody wants a consumer film slower than ISO 200 and the world would be a much better place if consumers simply used ISO 800 for everything. Kodak's advertising here has been pushing Max Zoom very hard as the universal panacea that can cure anything that ails photography, including chopped off heads and feet, and a few other common gaffes committed by consumers that have nothing to do with film. I was ROFL after seeing one of their commercials on television several months ago. Kodak makes some outstanding films including what's left of the Royal Gold family (the Gold films aren't among them). Their product/business strategies and marketing methods leave me baffled though.

-- John

To love this comment, log in above
July 01, 2003

To love this comment, log in above
July 01, 2003

;-)

-- John

To love this comment, log in above
July 01, 2003

My choice, Fuji S2 Pro

To love this comment, log in above
July 01, 2003

1) I do have a digital camera and use it quite a lot.
2) I also have a Bronica SQ 6x6 kit, including 5 lenses, bellows etc - the picture libraries I send them to still want medium format.
3) The online photo library that I submit to (alamy.com) will not accept a file size of less than 48mb (they will accept files from a digital camera with a minimum of 16mb but want them extrapolated up to 48) so scanned 35mm is still the best route for me.
4) I also have a 5x4 field camera which I love to use on occasions.
5) I have three OM1/OM2 bodies and a full range of lenses, bellows etc which I would have to replace.
6) When I go off backpacking for a couple of weeks I would have to hire a porter to carry all the spare batteries for a digital camera!
7) The Fuji is about twice as big and bulky as the OM1.
8) I would have to sell all this gear to be able to afford a 'pro' digital camera and lenses (and the camera would be obsolete in a couple of years!)
9) I'm an electronics engineer by trade and I just don't trust electronics!
10 er.. that's it.

PS - nothing against digital and I'm a member of the Digital Imaging Group of the Royal Photographic Society. It's just not the answer for certain things. Sorry to go on a bit.

To love this comment, log in above
July 02, 2003

Looked up the weight on the Fuji. By the time batteries are bolted onto it, it's twice the weight of a "single digit" OM body. About the same as carting around the M645.

I have a "day job" and do weddings on the side. I work the weddings solo; no assistant. The kit for that is substantial and includes monolights, stands, brollies, camera brackets and flash heads for them, not to mention the cameras and lenses. Everything has backup, or a backup plan. A typical indoor job employs 3 camera bodies; some require 4 (includes a medium format rig). Could do the indoor jobs with two, but it can require changing lenses, exposure settings, short-rolling one type of film for another, and shuffling film speed settings when doing so. Too much opportunity for error.

Some are converting to shooting weddings with high end digital, but it radically changes the entire workflow. Can't imagine doing it solo. My burn rate averages 50 frames per hour. Don't want to fuss with memory and battery management for making 350-400 photographs in 7-8 hours, about 250-300 of which will end up in a proof book.

I have backup batteries and a charger for the bracket mounted flash gear, but have never had to use them. A fully charged set can run the entire show. 35mm film reloads can be done in under a minute. Also cannot imagine six hours of shooting candids hand holding a bracket with camera and flash that's nearly twice as heavy as what I'm already using. Visions of tennis elbow run through my mind.

Digital has its advantages for some types of work, but for other types of fast-paced work making hundreds of photographs running solo, I haven't been able to devise a viable workflow that would allow using it. Everything I've seen written about it describes having at least one assistant to handle a laptop computer, and the memory and battery logistics.

BTW, the OM-1n with its mechanical shutter has been great for use with monolights. Cord it to a PC->shoe adapter in the Shoe 4, set shutter to 1/60th, set aperture to flash meter reading (usually f/5.6) and Rock 'n Roll. Don't even have to turn it on. Could use the PC socket next to the lens mount, but don't like to. Too much risk of pesky X/FP switch being accidentally set in the wrong position.

Back to the original thread:
I use Portra 160NC as the primary film for weddings. It has the restrained saturation and very wide latitude required for white dresses next to black tuxes. That same latitude also allows for some exposure deviation with candids if flash range is stressed to the max. For available light work during a ceremony I use Fuji Press 1600 or TMax P3200 (at EI 1600/Push 1 if there's enough light). Consumer films are too punchy with saturation and have too much risk of losing detail in either the white dresss or black tuxes. They're made for general purpose photography spanning a wide range of subject material, not portraiture or anything heavy with skin tones. In addition, if Portra NC is printed well by a pro lab, colors are very accurate. Bride's have an incredible eye for remembering *exactly* the color of her flowers, the bridesmaids dresses, and even the floor and walls where the wedding took place.

-- John

To love this comment, log in above
July 02, 2003