Whatever shall I do without Kodachrome?

[Dr Owl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

“Is that a serious question?” asked Eeyore, “or is it just a rhetorical flourish aimed an uncaring World?”

 

Pooh was confused. He was accustomed to not understanding Owl and Rabbit, but not understanding Eeyore was something new ... what was an arborical florist anyway?

 

“It’s a serious question,” said Owl, “aimed at those members of the LUF who overhear our discussion. I need to choose a new palette of films; I have certainties about film that were formed in the 1970s, and are now preconceptions; and I need advice.”

 

That was more like it, thought Pooh. Not understanding Owl was normal. But a pallet of films did sound like an awful lot ... he knew that Owl had never used as many as a hundred rolls in an entire year.

 

“OK,” said Rabbit, “let’s begin by finding out what your past taste in films has been.”

 

“Oh, that’s easy,” replied Owl. “Five types of film have accounted for more than half of my pictures. In the 1950s, I used Kodak Verichrome Pan exposed at ASA 40: that was what was on sale in London pharmacies at the time. On my first Rolleiflex, I used Ektachrome 64 (the film my father used) until I heard rumours of a new Fuji film -- NPS -- which was fairly fast, ISO 160, and had a growing reputation for unexaggerated colour. In 35mm, I used Tri-X for black-and-white and Kodachrome -- beloved Kodachrome -- for colour. I never took that much black-and-white, so Kodachrome 64 was by far my most frequently used film.

 

“Of these five films, only one -- Tri-X -- is still fully available.”

 

“Kodachrome became extinct more than two years ago,” said Kanga. “So, Owl dear, what have you been doing since then?”

 

“I have been proving myself to be the ultimate Betamax user by choosing one doomed film after another.

 

“Fuji NPS was frequently renamed, but the modifications were small, so I changed to that for 35mm as well when Kodachrome died. Then Fuji said that the new incarnation of NPS -- Fuji Pro 160NS -- would be available only as size 120 and as sheet film. Meanies.

 

“When my freezer ran out of NPS, I thought I'd try something completely different, and bought a batch of Fuji Provia 400X. It looked promising but, a few weeks ago, Fuji announced that that would be discontinued too. Super-meanies.

 

“I thought I should try the brighter-colour version of NPS -- Fuji Pro 160C. No, you can't, said CalArts 99: it may be on Fuji's website, but they've stopped making it, and supplies have run out. Mega-meanies.

 

“So, now I'm left having to choose a new palette of films. For medium format, that’s not a problem. Tri-X still has ‘The Look’ and Fuji Pro 160NS is still as good as it ever was at recording Anglo-Celtic skin tones.”

 

“Be careful, Owl,” put in Piglet. “You’re in danger of being speciesist. Pale pink is a fine colour for some piglets and some humans; but many piglets and most humans have much darker skin.”

 

“True,” accepted Owl, who carried on (Owl was good at carrying on), “For landscape, I guess the choice must be Fuji Velvia -- I already use it occasionally. But which speed should I choose? Both ISO 50 and ISO 100 emulsions are available: does anyone know which is the less likely to be discontinued?”

 

“He hasn’t finished yet, has he?” muttered Eeyore, quite audibly. “We’re on the second page of the post, and he is still discussing special-purpose films. Never mind. In this heatwave, maybe there will be a forest fire, and Owl will have to stop talking.” This sentiment seemed to make him look happier.

 

Owl ignored Eeyore (he was good at that too). “Velvia, however, is too vivid for every-day use -- in particular, Anglo-Celt... I mean the pale pink skin tones of some piglets and some people come out too red -- so I need general-purpose films.

 

“In the 1970s ISO 400 films weren’t general-purpose. A common estimation was that weren’t enlargeable past 6”x9”. Is that still true? And is it still true that refrigerator-stored films like Kodak Portra 400 and Fuji Pro 400H are a better bet than shelf-stored films like Gold and Superia?”

 

“Probably the film I shall use most is a colour film of ISO 160 or less. Am I right in thinking there are now only three choices: Kodak Ektar 100, Kodak Portra 160, and Fuji Provia 100F?

 

“In a sense that makes my task easier: I try a few rolls of each of the three and make my choice. Each of them is highly regarded, so there probably isn’t a wrong choice. But it does seem terrible that there are only three.”

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[250swb]

You are forgetting Rollei and Agfa films, look under the 'colour film' tab here

 

Ag Photographic. The Specialists for all traditional photo products.

 

Steve

[Mike Rawcs]

Delightful post Dr. Owl. I too miss Kodachrome 64, I never understood why Kodak didn't trumpet its unique properties (although it did tend to turn the pink skin tones of some piglets even pinker).

Please try them all and report back with a 'compared to Kodachrome' perspective.

 

Mike.

[CalArts 99]

Kodachrome was of course a B+W emulsion with the colour dyes added later during the processing of the film. I think it was more the K-14 processing that killed Kodachrome and not so much as Kodak killing off the film itself. Keeping that complex processing alive (compared to E-6) was never going to be feasible in light of declining film use.

 

I think if Kodak still offered colour positive film to the motion picture industry, then we'd also still have Kodak E-6 process film available. The colour emulsions available for still film are concurrent with what's available in motion picture film (i.e., Vision 3 and Portra.)

[Dr Owl]

You are forgetting Rollei and Agfa films, look under the 'colour film' tab here

 

Ag Photographic. The Specialists for all traditional photo products.

 

Steve

Thank you for that, Steve.

 

You have probably hit on one of my 1970s certainties that is no longer true.

 

Before the summer of 1972 (which was when I fell in love with Kodachrome) I had a dalliance with Agfacolor CT18 -- beautiful greens, but a slight overall yellow cast. By the end of the 1970s, however, I had concluded that I generally liked Kodak films most, with Ilford running a close second for black-and-white, and Fuji running a close second for colour.

 

Accordingly, since neither the local Southampton camera shop nor 7dayshop in Guernsey stocks Agfa, I didn't go searching for it. But Agfa Precisa 100 should certainly be added to the test list -- particularly since CalArts says it is made by Fuji

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/film-forum/298131-kodak-end-production-reversal-film.html#post2492981

 

-- and so too should Rollei CR200. Ag Photographic is a useful source I didn't know about; thank you for that as well.

 

Later,

 

Dr Owl

[philipus]

What's the Rollei CR200 like? I was unaware of this film.

[Dr Owl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Delightful post Dr. Owl. I too miss Kodachrome 64, I never understood why Kodak didn't trumpet its unique properties (although it did tend to turn the pink skin tones of some piglets even pinker).

Please try them all and report back with a 'compared to Kodachrome' perspective.

"There," said Rabbit, "doesn't it feel good to be completely PC?"

 

"Mum," Roo asked Kanga, "what does PC stand for?"

 

"Piglet Correct," she replied.

 

"I can understand why Kodak might not have wished to trumpet the qualities of Kodachrome in the 1990s," said Owl. "The zeitgeist had changed ..."

 

Pooh groaned.

 

"... and Kodachrome was seen as being old-fashioned. Kodak wouldn't have wanted an old-fashioned image to be attached to its digital camera and printer ventures.

 

"Fuji's trinity of slide films -- Velvia, Provia, and Astia -- excellent films all of them -- were seen as being modern and fashionable as well as good. It is hard to say which had the greater effect on Fuji's sales.

 

"No colour film has ever equalled Kodachrome for retaining colour in dark storage. My practice became to shoot a couple of rolls of Kodachrome at family weddings, and give the couple a selection of slides which, I assured them, would still be just as bright at their 60th wedding anniversary.

 

"Sadly, in some cases, the slides have lasted longer than the marriages."

[Dr Owl]

What's the Rollei CR200 like? I was unaware of this film.

In following up Steve's suggestions, I came across this

 

Rollei Digibase CR200 Pro 35mm 36exp Twin Pack: Amazon.co.uk: Camera & Photo

 

which is all I know so far.

[Phil U]

Flickr: The Rollei Digibase CR200 / CN200 PRO and RCN Pool

 

see here for tech spec http://www.agfa.com/sp/global/en/binaries/AVIPHOT%20CHROME%20200_tcm611-42591.pdf

[CalArts 99]

The Rollei film is marketed for cross processing and 'experimentation' (also marketed as 'Crossbird.) It's Agfachrome emulsion on a colourless PET base (no mask.) I personally found it to be pretty unimpressive. There tends to be a yellowish cast when processed conventionally in E-6, and it's grainy compared to the current Fuji Provia (which is very fine grained; the RMS value is 8.)

 

The Agfa Precisa reversal film is made by Fuji. The emulsion appears to be Provia. Depending on geographic location, the Agfa can be less expensive than buying the Fuji. Otherwise there is no visual difference.

 

Fuji is pretty much it for conventional E-6 emulsions now. I'd recommend sticking with Provia (or Velvia if you prefer higher contrast and higher colour saturation; unfortunately Astia is gone now, which I felt was excellent and very neutral.)

 

Buy a bunch of Fuji and freeze it, and concentrate on putting it to good use.

[Dr Owl]

Thank you. As so often, your post is most helpful.

 

The Rollei film is marketed for cross processing and 'experimentation' (also marketed as 'Crossbird.) It's Agfachrome emulsion on a colourless PET base (no mask.) I personally found it to be pretty unimpressive. There tends to be a yellowish cast when processed conventionally in E-6, and it's grainy compared to the current Fuji Provia (which is very fine grained; the RMS value is 8.)

Surfing yesterday (and picking up a computer infection on the way ) I found that the German firm Maco has bought or licensed the use of the Agfa and Rollei film names and the Agfa recipes. Maco has commissioned the old Gevaert plan in Belgium to make Rollei CR200 based on the old Agfa RSX 200.

 

The comments on the Web echoed yours. The grain is no worse than expected for an ISO 200 E6 film of its generation, but it cannot compare with a modern ISO 100 emulsion like Fuji Provia or the Kodak Ektachromes in enthusiasts’ freezers. There is a slight yellow cast ... shades of my Agfacolor CT18 experience in 1971.

 

The Agfa Precisa reversal film is made by Fuji. The emulsion appears to be Provia. Depending on geographic location, the Agfa can be less expensive than buying the Fuji. Otherwise there is no visual difference.

Prices for Precisa in the UK are about half those for Provia. Ain’t nothing wrong with selling budget film, but one of my 1970s certainties is that selling budget ANYthing forces the manufacturer to control costs carefully. And as a result, some useful but not essential factors, such as colour consistency, can suffer.

 

I’ll certainly try Precisa, but I’m feeling cautious about it. When taking pictures at, for example, a family garden party, these are pictures that cannot usually be retaken for another year – and possibly never – so I don’t want to risk a disappointing batch of film.

 

Fuji is pretty much it for conventional E-6 emulsions now. I'd recommend sticking with Provia (or Velvia if you prefer higher contrast and higher colour saturation; unfortunately Astia is gone now, which I felt was excellent and very neutral.)

AM I right in thinking that this recommendation is for an appropriate slide film, and says nothing about the relative merits of Provia and the Kodak negative films?

 

Buy a bunch of Fuji and freeze it, and concentrate on putting it to good use.

Putting it to good use is the hard bit. One of these films will surely provide consistent realistic colour and record details well at a reasonable speed. I shall let you all know at once if any of them provides good composition as well.

[CalArts 99]

Surfing yesterday (and picking up a computer infection on the way )

Sorry to hear your computer got sick while you were out surfing.

 

When surfing around here one can sometimes risk infections when the bacteria levels are higher in the ocean during the winter months. But I normally leave the computer at home.

 

I found that the German firm Maco has bought or licensed the use of the Agfa and Rollei film names and the Agfa recipes. Maco has commissioned the old Gevaert plan in Belgium to make Rollei CR200 based on the old Agfa RSX 200.

What the Freestyle folks in Hollywood tell us (they provide discounts for local institutions) is that 'Crossbird' and CR200 is cut from aerial film that is still being processed (Aviphot) and which is based on the old RSX II 200 emulsion. btw, I kind of liked Agfa RSX II 50 and 100 reversal films back in the days. Not a bad film, but I never used the 200 ISO version.

Prices for Precisa in the UK are about half those for Provia. Ain’t nothing wrong with selling budget film, but one of my 1970s certainties is that selling budget ANYthing forces the manufacturer to control costs carefully. And as a result, some useful but not essential factors, such as colour consistency, can suffer.

 

I’ll certainly try Precisa, but I’m feeling cautious about it. When taking pictures at, for example, a family garden party, these are pictures that cannot usually be retaken for another year – and possibly never – so I don’t want to risk a disappointing batch of film.

I don't like risking anything either, and feel it's really best to buy fresh and dependable labeled film (and film you've frozen) after all is said and done. But since film is coated by the mile in Fuji's factory, I assume they just snip off some and then pack it up to sell as Precisa. As long as it's handled properly during distribution, it should be fine.

 

Rodenstock made lenses for Calumet for a long time. The Caltar labeled Rodenstock lenses were no different than the Rodenstocks. People used to speculate that Caltars were rejected lenses off the Rodenstock assembly line in order to justify the cost differences. But that was nonsense, they are both identical. I have Rodenstock and Caltar lenses and they are equally good. It was lucrative for Rodenstock to produce a set numbers of lenses that Calumet would promise to buy under contract; they knew these lenses were sold already. Why screw up the relationship with Calumet. So I'm sure that Fuji has a contract for a certain volume of branded Precisa film and they want to keep that volume of already sold film going out the door.

 

But of course film isn't exactly like lenses. It's a perishable and time limited product (especially colour film) and needs to be handled properly during distribution. The CR200 and Crossbird is well liked by the Lomo crowd who like to cross process. For them, the handling of a film probably doesn't matter; they are looking for anomalies and funky effects. Rollei Crossbird Reincarnation - Lomography

 

AM I right in thinking that this recommendation is for an appropriate slide film, and says nothing about the relative merits of Provia and the Kodak negative films?

Personally my favorite in E-6 is Kodak E100G (no longer produced) and Provia (I also liked Astia which went away, too.) For colour negative films I like Portra 160 and 400 which are based on the Kodak Vision 3 motion picture films (which I use occasionally in 16mm single perf.) I really like that emulsion. In the past I've struggled with Fuji negative films for some reason and ended up not using them very much. My all time favorite colour negative film was Kodak Pro 100 PRN. It was great stuff that rivaled E-6 film in grain and colour.

 

Putting it to good use is the hard bit. One of these films will surely provide consistent realistic colour and record details well at a reasonable speed. I shall let you all know at once if any of them provides good composition as well.

 

Provia will provide the best results in respect to composition. When loaded in a Leica, the camera will then gravitate you towards award winning subject matter. Always be sure to wear comfortable shoes. I also know that Provia does work well in Nikon cameras (but to a lesser extent than with Leica.) I'm not sure what happens when you load it into a Canon or a Contax as I've never tried those combinations. Maybe ask Rabbit.

[StS]

This is a difficult question to answer, since there are effectively two companies in the market left, who manufacture colour film. One of them does not appear to be fully committed to film, the other one reminds me a bit of those people, who are moribund for decades to survive all other relatives in the end.

 

For the future of E6 slide film, it probably would need a fashion trend to get interest back, Fuji brought the Instax; the moment instant photos became fashionable again. Part of the people, who use film these days, appear to be interested in a special look rather than true colours, which, of course, is the core competence of slide film. Slide film on a light box is a beautiful sensation, but needs at least 120 size to be fully appreciated. Maybe someone brings an adapter, which allows to adapt a slide viewer to an iphone...

 

My personal choice for colour portraits is Kodak Portra (which is of course C41 negative film), offering to my taste a good skin tone reproduction, and can be scanned easily most of the time (although I had some strangely discoloured landscapes in the mountains recently, which other forum members were able to fix in post processing).

Since Kodachrome has been mentioned - I tried a few rolls, when it was discontinued, and found it actually to be quite difficult to scan. But then, I'm still learning scanning and post processing.

For black-and-white, I'm more and more drawn to Tri-X.

 

Stefan