 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / 35 mm / October 2004NEW Kodak Ultra Color Film
Has anyone tried the new Kodak Ultra Color film? http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/ultraColor/main.jhtml I just saw it yesterday in Target. It came in a package of three rolls for $9. The Kodak site says it's a professional film but the box called it a consumer film. I guess film is still very much alive. As a film devotee I'm always glad to see new products come on the market. :>Has anyone tried the new Kodak Ultra Color film? :>http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/ultraColor/main.jhtml :>I just saw it yesterday in Target. It came in a package of three rolls for :>$9. The Kodak site says it's a professional film but the box called it a :>consumer film. I guess film is still very much alive. As a film devotee :>I'm always glad to see new products come on the market. I've been using it and I'm very happy with it. The results seem to be the same as the "old" Supra films. The tech data sheets from Kodak are almost identical between Supra/Royal Supra/UC. I've noticed Kodak tend to call their 24 exp rolls "consumer films" while the same film sold as a 36exp is called "professional". Rob www.rcp.ca > Has anyone tried the new Kodak Ultra Color film? > http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/ultraColor/main.jhtml > I just saw it yesterday in Target. It came in a package of three rolls for > $9. The Kodak site says it's a professional film but the box called it a > consumer film. I guess film is still very much alive. As a film devotee > I'm always glad to see new products come on the market. When I ran across it at the Kodak Web site, I somehow got the impression that it was basically Portra UC relabeled. Look at <http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/colorNegativeIndex.jhtml?id =0.1.18.14.13&lc=en> to find out more.  Signature-Stephen H. Westin Any information or opinions in this message are mine: they do not represent the position of Cornell University or any of its sponsors. :>"me" <anonymous@_.com> writes: :> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] :><http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/colorNegativeIndex.jhtml?id =0.1.18.14.13&lc=en> :>to find out more. I got the same impression from the info. I tried Porta UC and didn't like the results, Kodak UC is more like their old Supra film (which I used a lot of). Rob www.rcp.ca >I got the same impression from the info. I tried Porta UC and didn't like the >results, Kodak UC is more like their old Supra film (which I used a lot of). Man do I miss Supra 100, particularly at $1.79 per roll. Sometimes I wonder if Kodak repackages just to raise prices 400%... I hope not. RP© > I got the same impression from the info. I tried Porta UC and didn't like the > results, Kodak UC is more like their old Supra film (which I used a lot of). According to my Kodak technical contact, Portra 400UC and Ultra Color 400 are exactly the same film in different packaging. I just bought a UC400 3-pack at Target, so I'll verify or disagree soon. > > Has anyone tried the new Kodak Ultra Color film? http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/ultraColor/main.jhtml > > I just saw it yesterday in Target. It came in a package of three rolls for > > $9. The Kodak site says it's a professional film but the box called it a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > When I ran across it at the Kodak Web site, I somehow got the > impression that it was basically Portra UC relabeled. Look at <http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/colorNegativeIndex.jht ml?id=0.1.18.14.13&lc=en> > to find out more. The speeds for Portra VC and Ultra Color are different and there is no tungsten version of Ultra Color. They may have similar characteristics though. Specs for these two films are here: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/databanks/filmDatabankColorN eg.jhtml?id=0.1.14.34.9.4&lc=en > > > Has anyone tried the new Kodak Ultra Color film? > > > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > though. Specs for these two films are here: > http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/databanks/filmDatabankColorN eg.jhtml?id=0.1.14.34.9.4&lc=en No, there apparently was a Portra UC (not VC) film for a while; I guess this is an attempt to market the same product differently. See <http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/pressReleases/pr20020715-01.shtml> for the original announcement of "Portra 400UC". And <http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/ppi668/ppi668.jhtml ?id=0.1.14.34.9.16.62&lc=en> gives code letters "400UC" for this film, the same as "Ultra Color 400". And <http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/ultraColor/qAndA.jhtm l?id=0.1.18.14.25.14.16.10&lc=en> says "KODAK PROFESSIONAL ULTRA COLOR 400 Film is a direct replacement for KODAK PROFESSIONAL PORTRAÊ400UC Film in the U.S., Canada and Japan." I think my hunch was right, at least for the 400 version. Signature-Stephen H. Westin Any information or opinions in this message are mine: they do not represent the position of Cornell University or any of its sponsors. > > > > Has anyone tried the new Kodak Ultra Color film? http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/ultraColor/main.jhtml > > > > I just saw it yesterday in Target. It came in a package of three rolls > > for [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > > When I ran across it at the Kodak Web site, I somehow got the > > > impression that it was basically Portra UC relabeled. Look at <http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/colorNegativeIndex.jht > > ml?id=0.1.18.14.13&lc=en> > > > to find out more. > > > > The speeds for Portra VC and Ultra Color are different and there is no > > tungsten version of Ultra Color. They may have similar characteristics > > though. Specs for these two films are here: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/databanks/filmDatabankColorN eg.jhtml?id=0.1.14.34.9.4&lc=en > No, there apparently was a Portra UC (not VC) film for a while; I guess > this is an attempt to market the same product differently. > > See > <http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/pressReleases/pr20020715-01.shtml> > for the original announcement of "Portra 400UC". And <http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/ppi668/ppi668. jhtml?id=0.1.14.34.9.16.62&lc=en> > gives code letters "400UC" for this film, the same as "Ultra Color > 400". And <http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/ultraColor/qAndA .jhtml?id=0.1.18.14.25.14.16.10&lc=en> > says "KODAK PROFESSIONAL ULTRA COLOR 400 Film is a direct replacement > for KODAK PROFESSIONAL PORTRA?400UC Film in the U.S., Canada and > Japan." > > I think my hunch was right, at least for the 400 version. If you haven't already then read what Kodak told me in my post at 10:55 AM today. It clears up all the confusion. > Has anyone tried the new Kodak Ultra Color film? I got some 100UC recently, but I have not had a chance to test it yet. > http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/ultraColor/main.jhtml > I just saw it yesterday in Target. No sh.t!?!? . . . . . That really surprises me to hear of it being sold in Target. I will have to check my local Target next time I am there. > It came in a package of three rolls for > $9. Were they 24 exposure, or 36 exposure rolls? > The Kodak site says it's a professional film but the box called it a > consumer film. I guess film is still very much alive. As a film devotee > I'm always glad to see new products come on the market. I thought it was only a professional product, though the Portra films do fine without refrigeration. If they are only 24 exposure, maybe those shorter rolls are being passed towards the consumer market. I have only seen it as 36 exposure, or 120 roll film. Of course, it would be great if I could get 120 roll film at Target . . . . . . ;-) Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio <http://www.allgstudio.com > > Has anyone tried the new Kodak Ultra Color film? > > I got some 100UC recently, but I have not had a chance to test it yet. http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/ultraColor/main.jhtml > > I just saw it yesterday in Target. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Were they 24 exposure, or 36 exposure rolls? If I rember correctly they were 24exp rolls. I doubt you'll find any 36exp rolls of consumer films at retail outlets like Target. > > The Kodak site says it's a professional film but the box called it a > > consumer film. I guess film is still very much alive. As a film devotee [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > 120 roll film. Of course, it would be great if I could get 120 roll film at Target > . . . . . . ;-) This is 135 film. 120 and 220 is available but not at Target. > Ciao! > > Gordon Moat > A G Studio > <http://www.allgstudio.com > . . . . . . . . . > > > It came in a package of three rolls for [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > If I rember correctly they were 24exp rolls. I doubt you'll find any 36exp > rolls of consumer films at retail outlets like Target. Bummer. The $9.00 price is close to what I pay for two rolls of 36 exposure. I suppose that this is available at Target is at least a slight convenience, certainly better than mail order. > > > The Kodak site says it's a professional film but the box called it a > > > consumer film. I guess film is still very much alive. As a film [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > This is 135 film. 120 and 220 is available but not at Target. I know . . . it was just wishful thinking on my part. I use mostly transparency films, though on some occasions negative films fit what I need to accomplish. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio <http://www.allgstudio.com > > . . . . . . . . . > > > > It came in a package of three rolls for [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > suppose that this is available at Target is at least a slight convenience, > certainly better than mail order. OOPS! After visiting the Ultra Color web page about sizes I see that the 135 film only comes in 36exp rolls. I guess my memory wasn't so good after all! Look here: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/ultraColor/sizes.jhtm l?id=0.1.18.14.13.16.8&lc=en > > > > The Kodak site says it's a professional film but the box called it a > > > > consumer film. I guess film is still very much alive. As a film [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > A G Studio > <http://www.allgstudio.com > > > . . . . . . . . . > > > > > It came in a package of three rolls for [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > all! Look here: > http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/ultraColor/sizes.jhtm l?id=0.1.18.14.13.16.8&lc=en Cool! I am checking one local Target tomorrow. I have been wanting to do more cross process imagery, so getting some 400UC would be nice, especially at somewhat low cost. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio <http://www.allgstudio.com > > > . . . . . . . . . > > > > > It came in a package of three rolls for [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > all! Look here: > http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/ultraColor/sizes.jhtm l?id=0.1.18.14.13.16.8&lc=en Okay, just a quick update. I tried one local Target near me, and they only have 400UC for $5.99 a single roll. Also, it is a really new product for them (just started this week), so they had it on the rack without a pricing tag on it. Perhaps there will be more soon, or the other Target near me might have a different selection. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio <http://www.allgstudio.com : > . . . . . . . . . : > > > It came in a package of three rolls for [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] : > If I rember correctly they were 24exp rolls. I doubt you'll find any 36exp : > rolls of consumer films at retail outlets like Target. : Bummer. The $9.00 price is close to what I pay for two rolls of 36 exposure. I : suppose that this is available at Target is at least a slight convenience, : certainly better than mail order. I got a 3 pack of Kodak Ultra Color 400 from Wal-Mart for about $11, and they were 36 exposure rolls. I think the first poster's memory is playing tricks. The film is quite good; easily much better than Kodak's 400 speed consumer film. Warren B. Hapke wbhapke@prairienet.org >Has anyone tried the new Kodak Ultra Color film? >http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/ultraColor/main.jhtml >I just saw it yesterday in Target. It came in a package of three rolls for >$9. The Kodak site says it's a professional film but the box called it a >consumer film. I guess film is still very much alive. As a film devotee >I'm always glad to see new products come on the market. I recently bought 10 rolls. Finished one test roll and liked the film. Reminds me a lot of Supra although the skin tones are much better with UC. I'll have a better idea of this film after a few more rolls. Color is saturated but not cartoonish and well balanced. Grain is minimal. BTW, I shot 100 speed. What really impressed me is how durable the negatives are. Thickest(?) film I've ever handled, seems to be very scratch resistant. Scans well, I used the Portra UC settings in vuescan and the scans turned out excellent although with a slight greenish color cast. 3 bucks / roll is a steal. A ten pack at B&H is (IIRC) $45 US. RP© > I recently bought 10 rolls. Finished one test roll and liked the film. > Reminds me a lot of Supra although the skin tones are much better with [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > out excellent although with a slight greenish color cast. > 3 bucks / roll is a steal. A ten pack at B&H is (IIRC) $45 US. Agreed for the most part. Are you sure there is a Portra UC setting in Vuescan? Must be new-- earlier versions have only NC and VC, so it was generally agreed that Royal Gold 400 or Royal Gold 100 (more cyan) were the most appropriate settings. Portra 400UC has been around at least a year. It is the best 400 speed print film on the market now, though it doesn't always interact well with Fuji paper or print channels. Kodak changed the name to Ultra Color 400 when they introduced Ultra Color 100. Ctein tested these films for the Sep/Oct 2004 issue of Photo Techniques magazine. >> I recently bought 10 rolls. Finished one test roll and liked the film. >> Reminds me a lot of Supra although the skin tones are much better with [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >Ultra Color 100. Ctein tested these films for the Sep/Oct 2004 >issue of Photo Techniques magazine. You're correct about vuescan. It is a VC setting I used. Tried the Supra 100 setting as well with about same results. I'll try the Royal Gold option next time. Thanks for the info. BTW: Anybody know if Konica Impressa 50 has been discontinued? RP© >BTW: Anybody know if Konica Impressa 50 has been discontinued? Guess I'll answer my own question. Here's email I recieved from B&H today............... -------------------- We would like to inform you that the Konica Minolta - KOI5036 REG - Impresa-50 135-36 Professional Color Print Film (ISO-50) you previously registered for notification has been discontinued and will no longer be available from B&H. ---------------------- BUMMER! RP© >Has anyone tried the new Kodak Ultra Color film? I do not like Kodak color negative films. However, a Kodak rep gave me a few rolls of the UC 100 & 400 speed films to try. I must admit that it is quite good. I was pleasantly surprised, and would use it again. R.B. > Has anyone tried the new Kodak Ultra Color film? I have heard the claim that it is a new name for what was previously called Royal Gold. >> Has anyone tried the new Kodak Ultra Color film? > > I have heard the claim that it is a new name for what was > previously called Royal Gold. UC400 is fairly distant from Royal Gold, especially with regard to skin tones, which are much more pleasing with UC400 than with any RG film. Judging only by film characteristics, Ektapress PJ400 and Royal Gold 400 were combined to make Supra 400, the professional equivalent of revised Royal Gold 400. For a short time, RG 400 was edge coded RC-3, but soon renamed High Definition 400. You can tell the difference between RC-2 and RC-3 because the latter has much better red-orange and magenta-purple accuracy. UC400 is significantly less grainy than RC-3 / HD 400 for most colors, although grays are about the same. UC400 is lower contrast. Skin tones are especially fine grained in UC400, rivalling most 100 speed films. The Agfa D-Lab.2 produces excellent results with UC400, as would (probably) the Noritsu digital minilab. > > Has anyone tried the new Kodak Ultra Color film? > > I have heard the claim that it is a new name for what was previously called > Royal Gold. Rumors abound on the internet don't they? I called Kodak at 800-242-2424 and here is what they told me: Royal Gold has been repackaged/renamed High Definition. Only the 200 and 400 speeds remain. Portra UC has been repackaged/renamed Ultra Color. Ultra Color speeds are 100 and 400. The other flavors/speeds of Portra remain the same. I was told that the replacement of Royal Gold by High Definition happened 2 years ago and was announced in a press release and trade publication for dealers. The replacement of Portra UC by Ultra Color was announced in February at the Photographic Marketing Association and began in April. Unfortunately I couldn't find links for these announcements so you'll just have to take my word for all of this or call Kodak yourself. B&H Photo is selling Ultra Color for $5. a roll or $25. for a package of 5 rolls, 100 or 400 speed. I think it's about time I make a return trip to Target and buy some of this film! |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.