Kodak High Definition 200 film

Discussion in 'Kodak' started by mmjmm, Aug 5, 2003.

  1. mmjmm

    mmjmm Guest

    I have just seen 3 packs of Kodak High Definition 200 film in a
    Priceline store. It is the first time I have found Royal Gold film in
    any shops in my area so I have never used it. I have the impression
    from reading posts in the past that Royal Gold is good film but never
    having used it I would like to know how it compares with Kodak Gold.

    Thanks
    Mike
     
    mmjmm, Aug 5, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. mmjmm

    Polytone Guest

    Better fine grain, slightly less saturated (better for skin tones) but
    sharper.

    HD is the last released version of RG...the same as Supra.

    Great film.
     
    Polytone, Aug 5, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. mmjmm

    JR Guest


    Can't be...never was a 200 speed Supra...maybe the 100 and 400 versions,
    but the 200 is a different animal.

    JR
     
    JR, Aug 5, 2003
    #3
  4. mmjmm

    mr. chip Guest

    I think it depends on whether you're in the US or the UK. Here in the UK the
    High Definition film is a 200 film that I think is a new emulsion.
    Elsewhere HD is a 400 and I think it's the old Royal Gold 400.

    Unless anyone knows otherwise...?

    Simon
     
    mr. chip, Aug 5, 2003
    #4
  5. mmjmm

    Polytone Guest

    Yes, there is a 200 Supra. Even B&H sells it right now.
     
    Polytone, Aug 5, 2003
    #5
  6. mmjmm

    Bob Sull Guest

    Except that there never was a 200 Supra..... 100, 400, 800. No 200.

    Bob
     
    Bob Sull, Aug 6, 2003
    #6
  7. mmjmm

    Polytone Guest

    Polytone, Aug 6, 2003
    #7
  8. mmjmm

    JR Guest

    Sorry, not in the USA, never was a Supra 200...100, 400, and 800.
    According to Kodak at least. All versions were discontinued and they
    refer all users to Portra films....

    JR





    n article <jaTXa.969$>,
     
    JR, Aug 6, 2003
    #8
  9. mmjmm

    JR Guest

    JR, Aug 6, 2003
    #9
  10. mmjmm

    Polytone Guest

    He never said there was no 200 Supra in the US. He said there was no 200
    Supra. There is. I've used it for years. It is great. It is MADE IN USA FOR
    WORLD (USAW) and I can buy it here....in the US. It doesn't matter. It is
    the same film as the last batch of Royal Gold they made and renamed to HD.

    Supra-Royal Supra=Royal Gold=High Definition

    Different markets. Same emulsion (consumer and "pro" versions"
     
    Polytone, Aug 6, 2003
    #10
  11. The grain structure is different. It looks like Royal Supra 200 has the same
    grain structure as Royal Gold 200, but it is different from Supra 100.

    Over exposing does have an effect on saturation and contrast, but you can't
    avoid having grain in parts of your image.

    I would suggest that over exposing Porta 160NC gets you closer to Supra 100.



    Philip Homburg
     
    Philip Homburg, Aug 6, 2003
    #11
  12. mmjmm

    Polytone Guest

    I've used it for about 2 years. I don't care what the press release says. It
    was out before last August. Just like High Definition 200 is not supposed to
    be out yet but B&H sells it. B&H has a way of getting things early. Must be
    their "mafia connections". LOL. ONLY KIDDING ABOUT THAT LAST LINE!

    100?

    I never enlarged either past 5X7.
    Again, B&H has it.
     
    Polytone, Aug 6, 2003
    #12
  13. mmjmm

    Bill Tuthill Guest

    That's a disappointment. Royal Gold 200 RB-2 was extremely grainy for a
    200 speed film -- according to Kodak just as grainy as Royal Gold 400.
    I found it to be just as grainy as advertised at PGI 41, plus it showed
    too much contrast in sunny images.
    True, but the EI 100 suggestion was Kodak's.
    It's believable -- 160NC is a great film.
     
    Bill Tuthill, Aug 7, 2003
    #13
  14. Are you sure you are talking about Royal Gold, not ordinary Gold?
    Royal Gold 200 looks quite good compared to normal Gold 200.
    On one hand scanning tends to normalize contrast, on the other hand
    the Kodak lab that I used to use switched to some kind of new (Kodak) paper
    that makes everything too contrasty.

    Anyhow, here are two examples of RB-200-2 and RS200:
    (Nikon LS-4000, 4000 ppi, 'normal' ICE, no sharpening)
    http://misc.hq.phicoh.net/grain/RB200-2-ice.png
    http://misc.hq.phicoh.net/grain/RS200-ice.png



    Philip Homburg
     
    Philip Homburg, Aug 7, 2003
    #14
  15. I wonder to what extend those images are suffering from grain aliasing.
    I don't have complete scans of Royal Gold 200 on-line. I do have
    Royal Supra 200:

    http://misc.hq.phicoh.net/tmp/l.3-80-2-3.jpg

    This was scanned on an LS-2000 and sharpened without threshold. I think that
    an LS-4000 or the new Minolta should give better results.
    I never pay much attention to those PGI numbers. I think it would be
    much better if Kodak would simply publish high-res scans of their reference
    prints.



    Philip Homburg
     
    Philip Homburg, Aug 8, 2003
    #15
  16. mmjmm

    Polytone Guest

    The last version of Royal Gold 200 (HD 200 now) is grain rated at 31. 400 is
    at 39.
     
    Polytone, Aug 13, 2003
    #16
  17. It is called Royal Supra here in Capetown.

    (when you can find it!)
     
    Johan Lexington, Aug 13, 2003
    #17
    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.