kodak film question

Discussion in 'Kodak' started by filmman, Feb 2, 2005.

  1. filmman

    filmman Guest

    Hi all, I was browsing through my film archives and came across some rolls
    shot around 7 or 8 yrs ago. The codes on it were "Kodak 5113 PJB-2" and the
    other "Kodak PJM-2". Can somebody pls tell me the common name for those
    films? The color saturation is very good and tonal gradation really
    smooth(to my liking). I think the current batch of Kodak films like the HD
    series or Portra series can't approach that level of quality... or is it
    because of the processing? those old films were developed by a custom Kodak
    Q-lab. nowadays even the pro Q-Lab use only frontier or noritsu mini-lab
    machines... last question, any recommendation on recent choice of
    films/negatives that, when processed properly, could achieve the desired
    output/preferences? thanks.
     
    filmman, Feb 2, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. filmman

    chrlz Guest

    PJB-2 = Ektapress Plus 400 Professional

    PJM-2 = Ektapress Multispeed Professional

    I don't know these films, but simpy suggest you try Portra 400 UC, or
    Fuji Reala if you haven't already. And if you like fine
    grain/sharpness, try Konica Impresa - I love that film, but it is maybe
    not as good as the other two on pale fleshtones.
     
    chrlz, Feb 2, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. filmman

    me Guest

    Agfa Ultra 100 is the leader in fine grain, color saturation, and tonal
    gradation of print films currently available. Having said that I must also
    add that the quality of a print is more dependant on processing quality than
    film quality.
    Film best,
    me
     
    me, Feb 2, 2005
    #3
  4. filmman

    Bill Tuthill Guest

    Yup, PJM (Ektapress Multispeed) was excellent when exposed at EI 500.
    It had mondo exposure latitude, a trait subsumed into Ektapress PJ400
    but then somewhat lost in Supra 400 due to overly high contrast.

    I agree that HD400 is basically worthless, especially for skin tones.

    Isn't PJB the same as PJ400? I'm not certain, but I think PJ400
    was a marketing renaming done in time for the Sapporo Olympics.
    PJA was remarketed as PJ100, then Supra 100 without much change
    (certain less than the change between PJ400 and Supra 400).
    Impresa is discontinued, but I agree with Chrlz's other recommendations.
     
    Bill Tuthill, Feb 2, 2005
    #4
  5. filmman

    Bandicoot Guest

    As others have said, these are Ektapress, once my standard C41 film, and one
    I miss. However, I like Portra a lot, but not the VC versions: 160NC and
    400UC are both very nice films (though for very different things).

    Supra seemed the closest thing to being a successor to Ektapress, but there
    isn't really anything now with the latitude of PJM. I also liked PJ's
    adaptability to mixed lighting.

    You might also like to try Fuji NPH - a 400 speed film with quite a lot of
    saturation and not bad flesh tones. I sometimes use it in 120, though I
    haven't personally used any in 35mm.



    Peter
     
    Bandicoot, Feb 2, 2005
    #5
  6. filmman

    chrlz Guest

    Actually, Bill, the UK konica minolta website now shows Impresa 100 and
    200 as WELL as Impresa 50...! Puzzling. Like you, I suspected Impresa
    had been dropped, but maybe not.. Might see if i can get some,
    although I am concerned they might just be rebadged New Centuria. Not
    that NC is a bad film, but it is miles different from Impresa 50.

    I would also be interested in your comments on Agfa Ultra 100 - I
    accept that it is fine grained, but had heard some reservations about
    color accuracy and gradation, given it's high saturation - I would have
    thought it was a little over-the-top for general use unless you are a
    Disneychrome photographer. (O;
     
    chrlz, Feb 3, 2005
    #6
  7. filmman

    Bill Tuthill Guest

    I really like Ultra 100. Although it's not good for skin tones,
    for flower/macro and landscapes, particularly in good lighting (full sun),
    it is excellent. My scanner can't deal with slide film, so Ultra 100
    is the next best thing. Ultra 100 has comparatively fine grained blues,
    just what you need for clear sky, but other colors are no better than
    most 100 speed films, and not as fine-grained as Reala. To amplify,
    skin tones are downright ugly with ultraviolet cast.

    Great film for shots without people, if you want high midtone-contrast
    than can be mistaken for high saturation. Blue sky looks like it's been
    polarized even without a polarizer. Purple flowers look totally 3D.
    Greens are vibrant. Reds block up, unfortunately.
     
    Bill Tuthill, Feb 3, 2005
    #7
  8. filmman

    filmman Guest

    Thanks all for the info!

     
    filmman, Feb 4, 2005
    #8
  9. filmman

    chrlz Guest

    Thanks very much for that info, Bill, I've heard enough now to decide
    to stay away!!! (O;

    I've moved most of my stuff to digital anyway, and while I like Velvia
    for vibrant slides, I prefer more realism when I print, and I hate
    blocky reds with a vengeance! I'll stay with Reala and my trusty
    polariser...
     
    chrlz, Feb 4, 2005
    #9
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.