Kodak gold?

Hello,

Kodak GOLD is the only high end film brand sold at corner convenient stores
around my place. Is it any good?
Other than that, since i'll be going to a proper photo equipment where they
have many brands of high end film, what color film brand do you recommend,
that has good definition and is not too expensive?

thanks,
Fred.

 

When I was using film - before I switched to digital - I preferred Fuji
films over Kodaks, mostly because I looked the Fuji colors better. The two
are equivelent in resolution, as far as I could judge. The Fuji film was
less expensive, most of the time.

If resolution is important, use ASA 100 film instead of ASA 200. The
trade-off is that film faster than ASA 100 works better in dim light or with
a flash. Smart Film cameras have drawbacks, but you can change film in
mid-roll (in most models), so you can use ASA 100 film outdors, and faster
film indoors.

As for buying film in convenience stores - check the expiration date.

 

what about konica film?

 

the reason i'm asking i cause i've been using these Konica VX200 fil (200
ISO, 24 exps), which i get for free when developping a roll at my local
photo shop. I find that the colors on the pictures made with it are too
bland. Am i imagining things? Does anyone have any comments on that peculiar
film?

thanks
fred.

 

I would say that if you are not satisfied with a film that is cheap
(or free) then you should definitely not use it. Processing and
printing cost more than the film (for negative film at least).

 

I'm very happy with the quality of Kodak film (even the
regular, mainstream Kodak GOLD or Kodak MAX films).

I normally use Kodak *Royal* Gold, though. But it seems
like that one as discontinued and replaced by the HD
(High Definition), which comes in ISO 200 and 400.

I got two rolls of it, but haven't tried it yet. Heard
good comments about it in this newsgroup, though.

If you want to compare notes, you can check some of my
pictures; they're *all* taken with Kodak film (I don't
think I've tagged them as being Kodak GOLD, or MAX, or
Royal Gold -- I think the ones of the Moon just rising,
the ones with John Abbott College buildings, those were
an experiment with Kodak Portra... Or was it Supra??
Well, the one that comes in a box yellow and pink;
supposedly a super high-grade professional quality...
I wasn't that impressed with that one). Anyway, you
can check them at:

http://www.mochima.com/personal

HTH,

Carlos
--

 

Fred , all I can say is about slides only , I stick with Kodachrome 64
( if they still make it ) .
If you have access to a good optical microscope and if you are willing
to have a little project - and later on to let us know of the results - you
can try this :
- set controlled condition to shoot a Target pattern ( color , b&w ,
resolution , all in one )
- buy as many brands of film as you can ( and different ASAs )
- shoot them and process them together
- cut small strips of each and look at high magnification using the
microscope ( if you don't have one , colleges offering photography may have
them , larger oil companies do )

Side by side , two or 3 at a time - , you will easily see the difference
in grain specially if you have a good microfilm purpose target .
Matter of fact , in the dark room you would use to focus on the grain
using a good magnification glass . It's fun !
Let us know if you'll go ahead with the project , very interested .
Thanks .

 

If you can find any of the ROYAL gold, that's good. ISO 200 was superb. I
use that mostly [as that's what my photo store uses for the PREPAID rolls].
Their [kodak] new file the HD was really good for a 400ISO. Defintely worth
a few rolls. I do like Fujifilm, but it really depends on the type you get.
I get usually Superia, but I find it's a bit bland and too green.

The other thing to keep in mind is where you take it in. I used to take it
to my supermarket. And it did okay... used AGFA stuff there, and it was
okay to good. I decided to pay a little more and WOW, what a difference!

-ry

 

The Kodak Gold films are quite good. They are somewhat more saturated than
Portra 160NC, which I prefer, but they have fine grain and good definition.
The colors are generally accurate, although they favor yellows a bit. I buy
them when I run out of film in the field, and I'm not unhappy with them.