Kodak Ultra Color 100 (100UC)

Discussion in 'Film and Processing' started by 25asa, Mar 6, 2004.

  1. Has anyone had the chance to use this stuff yet? I see its filtering
    into stores now and B&H lists it in stock. Can you give some opinions
    on it, or show some scans? What Kodak film does this look comparable
    to? Does it seem to be based off of Pro 100 (PRN), Royal Gold 100/
    Ektar 125, or Supra 100? Maybe Hi Def 200? Also how does the grain
    look compared to other Kodak films past and present? Does this come
    close to Reala in look? How about Afga Ultra 100?
     
  2. Mine just came in yesterday in 120. Haven't taken it out of the box yet, but i will start shooting it next week.
     
  3. Post your results and comments when you get it back. Thankyou.
     
  4. I have a 5-pack on order from Adorama right now. My hope is that 100UC is Reala on
    steroids, meaning slighter higher contrast and saturation. This would make it more
    suitable for shooting under overcast skies/flat lighting. I will not be happy if it is little
    more than a slightly tweaked version of Royal Gold. Now, if it resembles Portra/Ultra-
    Color 400UC with ISO 100 sized grain--that would be nice.
     
  5. The Kodak Technical information is at: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/e4035/e4035.jhtml?id=0.1.40.14.5.14.4&lc=en

    PGI for 35mm (4x6) print is 31 for the 100 film (UC400=40).

    MTF looks like it is over 20 (see curves).

    Not as good as Ektar 25, but similar to Supra 100 in these two measurements. I hope Bill can determine resolution.
     
  6. They must have recently adjusted the PGI numbers, because not long ago they were listed at 32 and 42 if I remember right. The 42 number caused a discussion of whether Portra 400UC and UC400 where the same film or not.

    Can anyone who can read the curves post what they tell you?
     
  7. I would guess this to be a modified reincarnation of Supra 100. I doubt that the could increase saturation much beyond that, at least not without a penalty in grain. Just shoot slides if you need more saturation like everyone else does.
     
  8. Ilkka,

    I shoot negative film, because I like to look at prints, primarily, and because I like the
    exposure lattitude that it affords. My favorite color negative film is Reala, which has as
    much saturation as I want; but its low contrast yields flat images in flat lighting. So, I am
    hoping that 100UC will be slightly jazzier for use in that specific situation.
     
  9. Ilkka,

    I shoot negative film, because I like to look at prints, primarily, and because I like the
    exposure lattitude that it affords. My favorite color negative film is Reala, which has as
    much saturation as I want; but its low contrast yields flat images in flat lighting. So, I am
    hoping that 100UC will be slightly jazzier for use in that specific situation.
     
  10. Have you tried to find a higher contrast paper? Anyway, it's highly probable that the 100UC has higher contrast than Reala. Unfortunately for me, it's not to be available in Europe, so I have to settle for Royal Supra 200.
     
  11. If you are going to scan your images I agree that you'll have better luck shooting slide films if you need greater contrast/saturation than lets say Portra UC, NPH or Reala.

    Current dyes in print films have pretty much hit the wall in terms of saturation with the only remaining thing to tweak being contrast. I'm still not sure what Ultra Color UC is supposed to fix. It's likely to not get along well with Fuji processing anyways.
     
  12. So Scott, I shouldnt expect anything more then a Royal Gold/ Supra copy? I figured they would be able to match the 400 speed in look which does seem more bold then say Hi Def film. Funny as no one since has made a film that was as far out as Agfa Ultra 50. If anyone has any samples this week on 100UC, please post them. I see the film is now in may stores across the US, but has yet to make it into Canada. Too bad I cant go across and get some myself.
     
  13. You can't come here and get some for yourself, Scott? Okay, fess up: what did you do that last time you were here??? ;-)
     
  14. By looking at the PDF data sheets for UC and Royal Supra I observe that:

    a) 100UC has exactly the same curves as Royal Supra 200

    b) 400UC has exactly the same curves as Royal Supra 400

    The PGI numbers are slightly different but that is about the only difference I see.

    Panos
     
  15. Last time I was in the States I looked dirty at the border officer, stuck my tongue out, and went "Naa Naa Naa Naaa NAAAAAA". So they tore my car apart using bolt cutters until they turned it into the worlds most expensive go cart. And they wouldnt let me pet the border dogs either. :p

    Seriously a trip to Seattle is not in my plans right now. By the time I go for the trip, they'll already have the film here.

    If the 100UC speed film is based off a 200 speed film, I will not be impressed. With all the technology they had in old 100 speed films, I cant see why they cant build off that. Even today it makes me wonder why they, with new film technology, can't get a PGI lower then 27 for 100 speed films. Instead they make new ones with an even higher numbers.
     
  16. I got some free sample rolls from the store on Saturday. I managed to shoot a couple of them later during the day. I should have a shoot tonight so I'll see if I can post the results later.
     
  17. Wow. That would be great. Id like to see how they come out.

    I just called one store in Vancouver. They must get film from the US, as they now just got in some 100UC in both 35mm and 120 5 paks. I asked to keep some aside for me and I will pick it up on Friday. Its weird because no other store in Canada has this and even Kodak Canada themselves does not have stock of this yet. If anyone is interested, the Vancouver store is Beau Photo. And the price for the 5 pak in 120 is cheaper then most pro paks too.
     
  18. Hi Kevin,

    That would be wonderful.

    Looking forward to seeing your posts.

    Best wishes,

    David
     
  19. Just checked Kodak's website. It would appear that the curves for 100UC are virtually identical to those of High Definition 200 (which is a re-hash of Royal Supra 200). Perhaps there are subtle differences not reflected in these curves, but, for the most part, it seems that 100UC is merely a repackaged HD 200. This kind of behavior is fairly typical for Kodak, who are fond of recirculating the same products under different names and categories. Is it any wonder that many serious photographers are losing confidence in this company? We don't like being jerked around, even as we understand that Kodak is moving the bulk of its resources into developing digital products.
     
  20. If the HD 200 thing is true, it looks like Kodak is screwing around with the speeds again. Ive never used Supra 200/ HD 200- so Im not sure how saturated it is. But since those are designed for normal use, I cant see how its going to give bold colors as the UC name suggests. But it makes sense since the PGI of HD 200 is 32 I think. They may have tweaked it however. But I cant see why they couldnt have based it off a 100 speed film since Im sure Supra 100 gave better results with even finer grain. I'll have to see when I get my rolls.
     
  21. I just thought of something else about the HD200 thing. If it is that film and you expose it at 100 speed- thus over exposing it one stop, doesn't that usually help with saturation and grain? I mean doesnt negative film when over-exposed give more saturated colors, and give the film slightly finer grain because of overexposure? Scott may be able to confirm this. A interesting test would be to take some HD200 and expose it at 100, then buy some 100UC, and shoot side by side. Then check the results. Anyone game for that? The color Im most interested in checking is the red, because the red was the boldest color I noticed in Portra 400UC. It popped on our Kodak paper in our lab.
     
  22. Some of the recent posts accuse Kodak of repackaging 200ASA HD as 100ASA Ultra Color. That's a serious accusation. It is my understanding that ISO (or ASA) is an international standard, and that there is a technical definition for film speed. If a company were to take a 100 speed film, as defined by the technical standard, and advertise it as 200 speed film, then wouldn't that violate the definition of film speed? And if so, then they would be subject to serious civil legal liabilities for false advertising, etc. I don't see how any rational company would do this sort of thing.

    And what other examples of such purported behavior are there, as suggested in some of the postings?

    I view many of these type of threads as nothing more than Kodak bashing. We may not like the advertising bozos, but Kodak is a leader in film. T-grain was their invention. And if 100UC shares similar technology to 400UC, then I would expect it to be a great film.
     
  23. Kevin,

    The spectral sensitivity curves that you have referenced are, in fact, identical. Only the
    vertical scales are different, which makes the curves appear different superficially.

    As to Seth's comment that this thread amounts to Kodak bashing, I say: nonsense. Those
    of us who are drawn to this discussion in the first place very much hope that Kodak will
    produce a superior product for us to use, an ISO 100 version of 400UC, to be exact. The
    jury is still out on 100UC, but there is reason to worry that it will disappoint.
     
  24. I got this email back from Kodak:

    Scott,

    Manufacturing of 100UC and 400UC began in the beginning of February, if
    product is not already available through the dealer of Kodak
    Professional Products it should be available shortly. To find a Kodak
    Professional Authorized Dealer - Stockhouse in your area (for a reseller
    of Kodak Professional films, papers, and chemicals), please visit:

    http://www.kodak.com/go/proproductsnetwork

    You can now search for a dealer using specific criteria such as Zip
    Code, Area Code, Dealer Name, City, or State.

    Ultra Color 100 is a new film and uses similar technologies to that of
    High Definition 200. The 100UC will have similar saturation
    characteristics to the 400UC. The scan that you saw may be the result
    of a systems anomaly used in the comparison you saw.

    PGI numbers listed in publications are being reviewed for any
    discrepancies. PGI numbers that are 4 units apart fall within the same
    JND window range and would not be noticeable to customers. Further JND
    details are published in the Kodak Publication E-58. I have taken the
    liberty of attaching this publication to this e-mail.

    If you should have additional questions, please be sure to revisit our
    site as we are continually adding information to enhance our support.

    For immediate answers to commonly asked questions, please visit:
    http://faqs.kodak.com/kodakprofessional

    For product and technical information, service, support, and downloads:
    http://www.kodak.com/go/professional

    For information on ProPass Magazine:
    http://www.kodak.com/go/propass


    Regards,

    Peter V.
    Kodak Information and Technical Support
    Kodak Professional
    Ph. 800-242-2424 ext. 19
     
  25. Benny, this is not Kodak bashing (I actually use Royal Supra 200 as my main film and am quite happy with it). The posts simply state the facts as observed by Kodak's own datasheets:

    UC100 has the same curves as Royal Supra 200 and High Definition 200 but with a PGI number of ONE less. UC400 has the same curves as Royal Supra 400 but with a PGI number of ONE more. So, Kodak is selling a slightly modified version of RS200 as UC100 with slightly better grain (that would be expected for a 100 vs 200 film) and UC400 is a slightly tweaked version of RS400 with slightly worse grain (huh?).

    Another hint is that both the RS and UC datasheets claim that both films have an "eye-spectral sensitivity".

    Now figure this out: In Europe they sell the same film as "Royal Supra Professional" and "High Definition", where the "professional" version of the film is LESS expensive (about 20%) than the "consumer" HD version (at least in the UK where I am).

    Panos
     
  26. I would expect Kodak to share technologies across their films. But I still stand behind my statement that it is hard to believe that Kodak would take a 200 speed film and sell it as a 100 speed film. Must not film speed satisfy a technical defintion according to an accepted international standard?

    My experience with Kodak films is that you shoot them at their rated speeds. I always shoot UC400 at 400, and will do the same with UC100. I just can't believe that UC100 is nothing more than HD200 with a new package.
     
  27. Did you not read the email I got from Kodak on this? He again said it was based off HD200 with some tweaking to boost saturation. So no they are not the exact same film, but may be closely related.

    Im picking up a couple 35mm rolls with a 120 pro pak on Friday. I'll shoot the 35mm the same day in the city, and report back on Saturday with the results. If in the mean time anyone gets back some developing of this film, please post the results.
     
  28. I looked at the curves available for both films and yes they look identical. So I called Kodak and talked to a product specialist on this. He said first off all their films are based on the same dye set. He looked at the curves themselves and mentioned there are minor difference between the 650nm-700nm range on the dye spec charts between 100UC and HD200. I asked him why they didn't base this off a 100 speed film like Supra 100 which has a finer grain. He wasn't sure why, so he said he was going to mention that to reps. He did say you have to do a practical use of the film to see the difference between them and that is where it will show. He even said the dye specs are close to 400UC as well. And the minor differences between 100UC and HD 200 he was mentioning about the tollerances between pro and consumer film as well. So its all up in the air at the moment. I guess all one can do it test the two films at rated speed, or maybe both at 100, and see what you get.
     
  29. It would be foolish to expect Kodak to invent a new film everytime they wish to make a change. So, we must be satisfied with incremental improvements for the most part, as long as they are actual improvements of previously successful products. It remains to be seen whether 100UC will be regarded as a change for the better and whether it will be serious competition for Fuji Reala.
     
  30. I just got back my rolls from the lab yesterday and I must say, it's definitely a 200ISO film. All of the highlights were blown out on my shots even when shooting at EI 100. 160VC has a much broader exposure latitude than this stuff. I won't be using this film for any serious work.
     
  31. Thanks for the quick report Kevin. A bit harsh and quick for only one time usage though, no? Could you tell us a bit about this lab you used? Professional? Used previously by you and you've gotten good results from them in the past with their printing and with other films? How do the negs look under a loupe? Do those blown highlight areas in the prints also seem blown in the negs? I do not refute your claims just want to hear a bit more of the surrounding curcumstances to help us all get a better idea of your results and how they were gotten---especially being the first report I've seen from this film. More details please.
     
  32. The lab was Omega Photo in Bellevue, WA. I take all of my film there for developing. I don't have them make prints of the images, I just put them straight to the scanner. I scanned the negs using an Epson 3200 with the contrast settings set for linear.
    Here's a link to two images shot on it:
    http://elaisted.com/vynta.jpg
    This was a straight scan, untouched in PS except for some resizing. The girl's skin is dark brown and her eye shadow was dark red.

    The settings I used on the camera were ei 100, 1/60th at f4.5 in TTL mode with a flash pointed at the ceiling to trigger a couple of Profoto strobes with umbrellas as slaves. This setup has worked very well for me in the past when shooting the same rig with other portrait films like 160VC, NC and Astia, so I didn't do anything special or different for this film.
     
  33. Ok. So we know now not to use it for people shots. Ive heard the same for Portra 400UC as well. When Im getting my rolls in the city tomorrow, I'll take some pics of the surroundings. I'll try and look for color. If I get anything decent to post, I'll do so. I'll let you know the results Saturday. The only thing is my pics will be on Edge Generations paper, which in itself boosts contrast even more. So it would be interesting to see the results.

    Have you used Portra 400UC for your shots and did they turn out the same as the pics you just did here?
     
  34. 400UC looked different to me than 100UC. I usually feel like I can overexpose 400UC and get some detail without losing too much in the highlights. I've used 400UC for people work but only sparingly because blemishes seem to look a little more obvious. I like 160VC the most but 400UC is very different than 100UC, it's almost like they're two completely different films.
    Here's a couple of links to shots using 400UC:

    http://elaisted.com/tomiko/0153010-R1-077-37.jpg
    Overexposed 1 stop indoors.
    http://elaisted.com/maria-1/c/color-beach-portrait-clouds.jpg
    Shot normal, no under or overexposure.
     
  35. Kevin,

    I am unable to see any images at your links,

    Nonetheless, it is surprising that highlights would be seriously blown with only one stop of overexposure, as color print films usually have tremendous lattitude for overexposure. I am looking forward to further tests of this film by others as well as myself.

    Rob
     
  36. Got my first roll back tonight. 35mm, Fuji Frontier. I don't like it. It's a conventional Kodak print film, and 400UC had much more snap. Reminds me of a cross between Gold 100 and regular Portra NC.
    007fkz-17008284.jpeg
     
  37. I picked up a couple 35mm rolls of this stuff. After reading comments on this so far, I held off on getting it in 120 till I see my own results. It looked like the weather was going to rain today, so I didnt bother to shoot in the city when getting the film. I'll have to do this another day. I very much doubt people will use this for people photography film due to its nature. This was not meant to be a Reala copy. I'll post my results when I get them. If anyone else uses this film, feel free to fill in.
     
  38. Scott,

    Looking forward to seeing your results and reading your impressions.

    Best wishes,

    David
     
  39. I just spotted this post on another photo.net thread that contains some info and actual
    scans of 100UC. It looks pretty good, even under bright sun and flash. I hope that the
    hyperlinks will appear. If not, here is the original thread: http://www.photo.net/bboard/
    q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=007YSp

    "Les Sarile , feb 29, 2004; 04:21 a.m.

    Just shot and processed my roll from the PMA show and have these as samples . . .
    Kodak 100UC A daylight
    Kodak 100UC B flash
    Kodak 100UC C low light
    Not what I expected from a "UC" type film as it certainly looks true to life color. I really like
    Reala and Agfa Ultra100 but not with flash and low light conditions. Scanning this range of
    different exposure shots usually means a different exposure setting with my Canoscan
    FS2720 but this roll of 36 didn't need any. So far so good."
     
  40. I couldnt get your link to work. It says its not there.
     
  41. Yes Ive seen these scans before. First off the color correction in them is off. Anyways those ones the color seem rather drab for a UC film. Look at the green in the trees for example.

    If the weather holds, Im going to try and shoot one of my rolls tomorrow. Then I can develop them myself on Monday at work, and later post the results. It should be interesting because the Edge Generations paper we use is high contrast.
     
  42. Bill, yes. I could scan it from the neg, however, and report back.
     
  43. What you posted is great, Dino-- it shows us how 100UC looks printed
    on a Frontier. I'll be testing it soon with Vuescan.
     
  44. Bill, I also scanned the negative tonight at home, but it's
    extremely flat and has no contrast. I think maybe my Frontier lab
    does that and then plays around with the final prints. The
    negative looked like a washed-out 800 speed film or
    something...
     
  45. Would it be logical to conclude that the grain
    between 100UC and Ektar 25 are similar given the following?

    Kodak had two PGI ratings assigned to film, one old and one new.
    With the old system, Portra 160NC had a PGI of 30 and Ektar/RG25
    had a PGI of 25. That's a jnd (just noticeable difference) of 2.5.

    The Portra 160NC emulsion remained the same (I do not recall
    a big change in grain when the PGI system shifted), but under
    the new system, 160NC has a PGI of 36. 100UC has a PGI of 31.
    That's also a jnd of 2.5.
     
  46. Whoops! My mistake. When the PGI system shifted, so did JND
    from 2 to 4. The new PGI rating system is 2x more accurate. That means the JND of 100UC from 160NC is just
    1.25.

    Under the new PGI system, Ektar/RG25 would be around PGI 26. Supra 100
    would be around PGI 30-31. It would be safer to assume 100UC is
    closer to Supra 100.
     
  47. Huh? How do you get jnd-2.5 from a difference of 5 (in both cases)?
    Anyhow, Kodak PGI numbers are at best a very, very rough guide.
     
  48. Bill,
    for the old PGI scale, a difference of 2 points indicated
    a "just noticeable difference".

    For the new PGI scale, a difference of 4 points indicated
    a "just noticeable difference". So every 4 points equals
    one step of JND.

    That's why it would be inaccurate to list Supra 100's PGI
    of 27 from the old scale with Kodak's film PGI from the new scale.
    The PGI for each film does not translate perfectly from the old
    system because it was more vague (every 2 versus every 4 points
    to indicate one JND). So if you want to list Supra 100's PGI,
    you must translate it to the new scale (around 30-31 PGI).
     
  49. Steve, unless I am mistaken, Kodak did not change the PGI system,
    only the JND (just noticeable difference) guideline.
    After reading Kodak's PGI documentation, I never understood how it
    accounted for grainyness of different colors, anyway.
    Given variations by color, emulsion batch, and other factors,
    it's easy to understand why PGI numbers are not always consistent.
     
  50. Continued in this thread:

    http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=007lgo

    There are my results of this film.
     
  51. I think I might be able to add something to this discussion on the Ultra 100 film. I have been shooting Royal Supra 200 for several months now and I had some questions about it that I e-mailed Kodak, mainly the information on the inside of the box that film came in, they reccomended shooting in bright sun for RS 200, 250sec@F11 and that is the same as you would shoot a 100 speed film at! so here I have copyed Kodak's answer to my Question, I have not thought about it much until I saw this thread about the Ultra 100 and now I am suspicious that this is indeed RS200 film.


    Thomas,
    Thanks for your questions. My answers follow in your original note

    Question: Hello

    I have been using your Royal Supra 200 and 400
    film for quite a while now and overall I like the
    film very much, however there is one thing I
    cannot figure out about your reccomended shooting
    settings for both of these films. For the RS 200
    you reccomend on a bright sun day distinct shadows
    to use a setting of 250 @ F11, this is what is
    troubling me, that is the same setting that you
    would use for a basic daylight setting or rule of
    16 for a 100 speed film, and 250 @ F11 is the same
    as 125 @ F16 the same as 100 speed film? can you
    explain to me why this is especially when the
    camera automatically sets the speed to 200 ISO.

    I think it is helpful to realise what the exposure tables are for. The are to enable someone without an exposure meter or automatic camera to set their camera and get good results. The values we use in our tables for colour negative films, call for 1 more stop of exposure than the theoretical 1/ISO @ f16 rule, to take advantage of the exposure latitude of colour negative films. It is not always an easy task to assess weather conditions, so for colour negative films that have wide exposure latitude we believe building in a + 1 stop exposure into the table provides increased protection against under exposure and overall gives a higher yield of good pictures. However this is not the case for slide films that have very little exposure latitude. If you examine the exposure tables for these, they conform to the 1/ISO @ f16 rule.


    Is this really a 100 speed film being pushed 1
    stop at 200 ISO? if the camera is set manually to
    250 @ F11 in bright sun per your reccomendations?
    No RS 200 is a 200 ISO film, not a "pushed" 100.

    Also I am in the USA buying this film imported, is
    this the same film that is sold in the USA as High
    Definition?
    The films are not the same, although they do utilize similar technology.

    I also seem to be getting some overexposure with
    this film when shooting at 200 ISO, based on
    metering with a incident meter that has been
    calibrated and used with other films with no
    problems, however with the RS 200 my lab seems to
    consistantly have to add density to my prints,
    sometimes +3 or +4 density, where I don't have
    this problem with Fuji reala 100 shot with the
    same meter.

    Without knowing what equipment the lab is using for printing, it is very difficult to comment. If the lab is a pro lab using video analysis equipment, then +3 or + 4 in density corresponds to an increase in log H onto the paper of 0.03 to 0.04. This means the film is 0.03 to 0.04 units denser. The origin of this could be relative speed differences between the films, and their nominal ISO settings, or just due to differences in the base or mask density. If this was really speed it would be equivalent to 1/4 of a camera stop.


    I would appriciate any information you
    could shed on these questions for me especially
    the speed you reccomend for sun 250@F11. Please
    reply by e-mail.

    I hope these answers help

    Adam Simmonds
    Kodak Professional


    Thomas Pendleton <tomp@friend.ly.net>

    23/01/2004 23:48
    Please respond to Thomas Pendleton

    To: <GB-KPro-Webmail@kodak.com>
    cc:
    Subject: kodak.co.uk: Professional Photography Products



    Question: Hello

    I have been using your Royal Supra 200 and 400
    film for quite a while now and overall I like the
    film very much, however there is one thing I
    cannot figure out about your reccomended shooting
    settings for both of these films. For the RS 200
    you reccomend on a bright sun day distinct shadows
    to use a setting of 250 @ F11, this is what is
    troubling me, that is the same setting that you
    would use for a basic daylight setting or rule of
    16 for a 100 speed film, and 250 @ F11 is the same
    as 125 @ F16 the same as 100 speed film? can you
    explain to me why this is especially when the
    camera automatically sets the speed to 200 ISO.
    Is this really a 100 speed film being pushed 1
    stop at 200 ISO? if the camera is set manually to
    250 @ F11 in bright sun per your reccomendations?

    Also I am in the USA buying this film imported, is
    this the same film that is sold in the USA as High
    Definition?

    I also seem to be getting some overexposure with
    this film when shooting at 200 ISO, based on
    metering with a incident meter that has been
    calibrated and used with other films with no
    problems, however with the RS 200 my lab seems to
    consistantly have to add density to my prints,
    sometimes +3 or +4 density, where I don't have
    this problem with Fuji reala 100 shot with the
    same meter. I would appriciate any information you
    could shed on these questions for me especially
    the speed you reccomend for sun 250@F11. Please
    reply by e-mail

    Thank You
    Tom Pendleton

    Category: Professional
    Subcategory: kodak.co.uk: Professional Photography Products
    conf: /europe/include/mul/corp/contact/contact_UK_en.conf
    Referer: http://wwwuk.kodak.com/UK/en/corp/contacts/
    Country: UK
    Name: Thomas Pendleton
    Email: tomp@friend.ly.net
    Phone:
    Fax:
    Address 1:
    City:
    Region:
    Postal Code:








     

Share This Page