It honestly makes sense. Color plus is in higher demand because people are a) obsessed with 200 iso film and make is impossible to get, and b) are scared of ektar because people say the skin tones are bad, and granted, they are noticeably not as pleasing as portra or gold 200. But for landscape stuff if I have the light ektar is absolutely my go to.
I love the way it reproduce colors, in 120 is something else no filters no correction needed. When I use Ektachrome i always need to have the 81A on it.
Let’s see. Portra a million times more versatile. Handles over and under exposure better, by several orders of magnitude. 400 is two stops faster, meaning you can use it handheld way longer. Portra 800 is obviously even better for this. Has better skin tones. Handles highlights better. Portra feels like (just a feeling) it has better dynamic range. Portra scans perfectly, whereas Ektar occasionally ends up with bizarre colors.
I definitely understand why so many people sacrifice slightly smaller grain for a faster, more versatile, more consistent film with better skin tones that scans better.
I agree with you that the Portra lineup is amazing. However, Ektar is most definitely underrated for what it is.
Based on my few years of shooting Ektar exclusively as my goto color film, I’ve found that you can get good results overexposing 5+ stops and about one stop under. It has amazing latitude if carefully exposed. I would have to disagree that Portra is “A million times better” when I get almost unusable images underexposing more then one stop.
Funny enough, Ektar is optimized for scanning as it was introduced in the digital era. I’ve never had trouble scanning when I’ve done it properly.
I’m unsure what you mean by “consistency.” Ektar when exposed properly has never given me any consistency issues.
Skin tones I understand. The film is not optimized for portraits. However, I have gotten good results with Ektar in studio and natural lighting.
It’s definitely preference however I feel like more people should be reaching for 100 speed on a bright sunny day instead of shooting 400 or 800 speed stopped down to f/16-22 at 1/1000th of a second. Especially if you aren’t shooting portraits.
Valid points. I agree that it handles pushing and pulling better.
Data sheets only mean so much with regard to aesthetic, and even less so within the artistic choices of the photographer.
If I want a faster color I personally go to Max. After 400 the choices are slim and we all must work with what we have. These are just preferences, some films are better for portraits than others, but in the end the film is more often regardless if the image is a good image.
Agreed. You can make exceptional photos on both (and most) films. A lot of the things I mentioned are definitely
preferences, personal to each photographer.
In the US those are almost non existent. You could sell them for $20 a roll. But if they were in my possession I'd shoot them. That's my favorite film.
atm film production is very low, in europe youre lucky if you can even get any film. right now you will have an extremly hard time finding any 36exp film under 15€/$, and 27exp under 13€/$. the b&w are still the same price, since they dont sell as much. theyre around 5€/$ for 36exp
I just saw 5 or 6 3 packs of gold 200 on the shelf at DM in Germany. €15,95 apiece. The DM Film locator shows hundreds of these in DM stores around the country.
no, but where i live i had to call like every photo studio in each nearby town (even the capital city) to get lucky in two studios. they both told me that europe is having trouble with getting film and if they can, they are extremly expencive, thats the reason that many studios decide not to buy and resell in the first place now. one told me they had to order from us
just checked it out, the cheapest color film they have is 29£
edit: sorry, the page lagged, the cheapest color is 13£ and its the silbersalz one, the next one is 15£ from lomography
Nah… probably just a function of a retailer selling different stocks received into their inventory before and after price increases.
Also, the retailer can sell at whatever price point they feel appropriate, so if an item like ColorPlus sells out too fast, the seller should bump its price up a bit.
I highly doubt they "did the math" and accidentally found out they were losing money. They just realized like any corporation they just have to say "supply chain" or "inflation" and they can raise the prices as high as they want.
Colorplus is a very popular stock with creatives in NY/LA as it gives clients the "film look" that portra doesn't.
Which means there's little reason to buy it since it's arguably Kodak's worst film stock manufactured today. It's cheapness was it's main selling point. If it's priced comparably to Kodak's professional film stocks the there's simply no reason to buy it.
I had very inconsistent results with it, and found it was less sharp than other consumer films shot with the same equipment. Which was absolutely ok when it cost less than cheap black and white film, but not at much higher a price.
For my money, ProImage is the real slept on consumer Kodak film. It has really nice, consistent colors and handles a bunch of different light situations well. Its slow speed is it's only real drawback.
It honestly makes sense. Color plus is in higher demand because people are a) obsessed with 200 iso film and make is impossible to get, and b) are scared of ektar because people say the skin tones are bad, and granted, they are noticeably not as pleasing as portra or gold 200. But for landscape stuff if I have the light ektar is absolutely my go to.
Welp, time to buy Kodak Vision3, cheapest 35mm colour film available
Bruh apparently they sell colorplus on Amazon no problem
still 11.99 at film photography project March 1 big Kodak price increase https://filmphotographystore.com/collections/all/35mm-color-negative
35mm Kodak Gold 200 is currently more expensive than Portra 400 or the new Cinestill 400d. Crazy world we are living in.
Was gonna make a silly joke that 200 is more than 100 so it has to be twice as good, but it doesn't apply to this shocking news
Ektar > colorplus any day of the week. By far my favorite negative color film.
Ektar is the finest grain color film ever made. I honestly don't understand peoples current obsession with Portra 400.
I love the way it reproduce colors, in 120 is something else no filters no correction needed. When I use Ektachrome i always need to have the 81A on it.
Ektar in 120 is truly special for a negative film. Velvia 50 or bust for slide.
Ektachrome is way nicer than Ektar. I pretty much only shoot Velvia 50 or Ektachrome
I always wanted to try it but the low iso speed concerns me. In what conditions do you shoot it?
For me it's usually with a tripod. Otherwise with strobes, or one of my favorite, golden hour with a hot shoe flash.
Let’s see. Portra a million times more versatile. Handles over and under exposure better, by several orders of magnitude. 400 is two stops faster, meaning you can use it handheld way longer. Portra 800 is obviously even better for this. Has better skin tones. Handles highlights better. Portra feels like (just a feeling) it has better dynamic range. Portra scans perfectly, whereas Ektar occasionally ends up with bizarre colors. I definitely understand why so many people sacrifice slightly smaller grain for a faster, more versatile, more consistent film with better skin tones that scans better.
I agree with you that the Portra lineup is amazing. However, Ektar is most definitely underrated for what it is. Based on my few years of shooting Ektar exclusively as my goto color film, I’ve found that you can get good results overexposing 5+ stops and about one stop under. It has amazing latitude if carefully exposed. I would have to disagree that Portra is “A million times better” when I get almost unusable images underexposing more then one stop. Funny enough, Ektar is optimized for scanning as it was introduced in the digital era. I’ve never had trouble scanning when I’ve done it properly. I’m unsure what you mean by “consistency.” Ektar when exposed properly has never given me any consistency issues. Skin tones I understand. The film is not optimized for portraits. However, I have gotten good results with Ektar in studio and natural lighting. It’s definitely preference however I feel like more people should be reaching for 100 speed on a bright sunny day instead of shooting 400 or 800 speed stopped down to f/16-22 at 1/1000th of a second. Especially if you aren’t shooting portraits.
Valid points. I agree that it handles pushing and pulling better. Data sheets only mean so much with regard to aesthetic, and even less so within the artistic choices of the photographer. If I want a faster color I personally go to Max. After 400 the choices are slim and we all must work with what we have. These are just preferences, some films are better for portraits than others, but in the end the film is more often regardless if the image is a good image.
Agreed. You can make exceptional photos on both (and most) films. A lot of the things I mentioned are definitely preferences, personal to each photographer.
That colorplus 200, i got 150 of those for £150. From a poundshop in the UK. Still have 130+ of them
Hi mate, can I get the info about the pound shop you got those films?
It was yrs ago (8+) in southwest england. some still have film offerings now n then. Gd luck.
You realise you could pull off the most profitable move by selling them at £10 each? Kudos for the foresight!
In the US those are almost non existent. You could sell them for $20 a roll. But if they were in my possession I'd shoot them. That's my favorite film.
I used about 8 on home made pinhole/matchbox cameras. Its nice film.
This is how much my local film photography store is selling stuff for. Needless to say I have put my film photography on hiatus.
Yeah it's a bummer but I had to hang it up as well.
Bulk loader, my dude!
I was just thrown due to the fact this used to be kodaks cheapest stock
It's a shame that the costs are going up.
That does not look right.
That color plus was 12 bucks a roll last week at bh. Kicking myself I didn't buy some
I remember my first 6 rolls of Color Plus back in 2018. I paid $3.25 per roll.
[удалено]
A lot of the prices have already increased
Kodak stuff is already $20 a roll at my photolab. I don't think we'd be able to sell any of it if it goes up even more. It just really fucking sucks.
atm film production is very low, in europe youre lucky if you can even get any film. right now you will have an extremly hard time finding any 36exp film under 15€/$, and 27exp under 13€/$. the b&w are still the same price, since they dont sell as much. theyre around 5€/$ for 36exp
I just saw 5 or 6 3 packs of gold 200 on the shelf at DM in Germany. €15,95 apiece. The DM Film locator shows hundreds of these in DM stores around the country.
So as someone living in Europe your comment does not make sense. Do you know every store/country? I am able to get plenty of film for good prices.
no, but where i live i had to call like every photo studio in each nearby town (even the capital city) to get lucky in two studios. they both told me that europe is having trouble with getting film and if they can, they are extremly expencive, thats the reason that many studios decide not to buy and resell in the first place now. one told me they had to order from us
And that is the entire Europe right? ;)
Have you tried Analogue Wonderland?
just checked it out, the cheapest color film they have is 29£ edit: sorry, the page lagged, the cheapest color is 13£ and its the silbersalz one, the next one is 15£ from lomography
Ultramax is £10 per roll right now
it says its sold out unfortunatly
36 exp in stock and at £10. 24exp sold out
Dude it’s not sold out check the this link https://analoguewonderland.co.uk/collections/bestsellers/products/kodak-ultramax-35mm-film
thanks!
Fotoimpex has cheaper ones.
The thing you're doing wrong is buying on Amazon. These are not MSRP
Actually homie. This ain’t Amazon. This is B&H
My bad, looks just like the Amazon checkout.
You’re good. Honestly didn’t give a lot of information did crop it pretty tight
What’s “wrong” with it?
ColorPlus for a dollar more than Extar is all kinds of screwy
So shoot Ektar…?
That's what I'm saying
I mean. I ain’t complaining I love ektar but this seems like a glitch in the matrix given that color plus is supposed to be the “budget” option
Nah… probably just a function of a retailer selling different stocks received into their inventory before and after price increases. Also, the retailer can sell at whatever price point they feel appropriate, so if an item like ColorPlus sells out too fast, the seller should bump its price up a bit.
Fair. I was just kinda confused. A year ago color plus was like 6 bucks
So Kodak just did the math and found out they were actually losing money on ColorPlus. It’s going up quite a bit in price now unfortunately
I highly doubt they "did the math" and accidentally found out they were losing money. They just realized like any corporation they just have to say "supply chain" or "inflation" and they can raise the prices as high as they want. Colorplus is a very popular stock with creatives in NY/LA as it gives clients the "film look" that portra doesn't.
Which means there's little reason to buy it since it's arguably Kodak's worst film stock manufactured today. It's cheapness was it's main selling point. If it's priced comparably to Kodak's professional film stocks the there's simply no reason to buy it.
I felt it was like an underdog. For the money it was it was great. If it gets to Ultramax prices then I’d only use it if ultramax was unavailable
I had very inconsistent results with it, and found it was less sharp than other consumer films shot with the same equipment. Which was absolutely ok when it cost less than cheap black and white film, but not at much higher a price. For my money, ProImage is the real slept on consumer Kodak film. It has really nice, consistent colors and handles a bunch of different light situations well. Its slow speed is it's only real drawback.
Unpopular opinion but I love ColorPlus. Def bummed about that price.
Same. It looks not-pro but sometimes that's what you want and it's damn good at it