Is 100 speed negative film gone ?

[johnw63]

I usualy just pick up top film at the local department store, but it

seems nobody stocks 100asa anymore. 200, yes. Kodak MAX, sure. Various

version of Fuji too. But, not 100 print stuff. Is it a dead speed ? If

not, where is a good place to get it ? If I were good enough, I go

with slide film, but...I know I haven't taken a shot worth the exra

cost, yet.

[stephen sullivan]

Where are you shoping? I see plenty of 100 speed film here, Seattle, WA by Kodak, Fuji, Agfa

& Ilford.

 

Suggestion: Instead of shopping at a department store for film, why not try a camera store.

 

There you'll find plenty of 100 speed film by Kodak, Fuji, Agfa & Ilford: E-6, C-41 and B&W

film. Happy shoping.

[randall ellis]

I believe you can still get Superia, Reala, Gold 100, Portra 100, Konica VX-100, and Agfa Color and Optima in 100.

 

- Randy

[carl photography]

The best Internet vendors, such as www.bhphotovideo.com and www.adorama.com, carry

a much wider selection -- at lower prices -- than local stores.

 

I use Fuji Reala 100 and Kodak UC 100 (as well as the ISO-160 "professional" negative

films).

 

"Brandon's Dad"

[jbq]

It's gone from the consumer-only places, but you'll find some in any camera store. Or you can order from places like adorama or B&H.

 

ISO 50 is gone, I think.

[25asa]

No we still have Ilford Pan F 50. But for how long is the question. If you count Fuji Fortia 50 which is actually 64 now as far as I remember. Also Efke/Adox 25 and 50. Don't forget all those old stock films on Ebay which go for a fortune these days.

[jbq]

I actually meant color negative, even though I didn't say so.

[georg_kern]

Agfa Vista 100 and Ultra 100 are cancelled, and Optima 100 will also die. The Kodak professional 100 ASA negative film (however they call it at the moment) is not available in Europe. 100ASA now is considered to be an obsolete special-purpose, slow film, like 50 and 25 ASA was 20 years ago.

 

The stores seem to think that negative film is now only used by people who are either too poor or too technical incompetent to buy and use a digital camera, so 400ASA as a general film is good enough for them.

 

Regards

 

Georg

[ilkka_nissila]

Yeah, well, 100UC exists in the US, and then there is 200UC in Europe, which is only a tiny little bit grainier than 100UC.

 

Many people who use slow film seem to use slide film and when they need 400 speed, switch to negs. Kodak has the technology for new color negative films which are 400 and 800 speed but have the grain of iso 100 films, so we should be happy when they lauch them. I would prefer to have Ektar 25 grain in a 100 speed film but I'm weird ...

[r.t. dowling]

Fuji still makes Reala 100; use it and be happy. It's a great film.

[wayne_schulz]

Agfa Ultra 100 gone? That is sad. Interesting outdoor film for some applications.

 

Are film companies declaring all our past expenditures on good equipment obsolete? So fast?

 

Wayne S

[johnw63]

In my neck of the woods, there is , as far as I know, only ONE actual camera store, and it's

a small one that does mostly developing and has a small rack by the counter. Target, Wal-

Mart, the local grocery store, have all stopped stocking it. I used to get stuff at Ritz, but

they closed the store up here. 200 speed I can find. A Rite-Aid pharmacy had 100 speed

Exctachrome, but I don't need to spend $12 a roll, at this point. I liked the Kodak Royal

Gold 100, but ....that seems to be gone. Is that what the 100UC replaced ?

[reuben_c]

"I would prefer to have Ektar 25 grain in a 100 speed film but I'm weird ..."

 

I'd settle for getting Ektar 25 grain in a 25 speed film, but I'm anachronistic. If my freezer holds out and they keep making C41 soup, I'm probably OK for the rest of my life. Photographers shouldn't have to be scroungers, "progress" shouldn't run bass-ackwards, and marketing departments shouldn't be headed up by brain-twisters who majored in Orwellian Studies.

[reuben_c]

"I liked the Kodak Royal Gold 100, but ....that seems to be gone. Is that what the 100UC replaced ?"

 

I believe that 100UC is more like RG200 in drag. I've seen what looks like that emulsion sold as a 200 speed film on one of Kodak's European web pages, and I've seen comments about it behaving better exposed at 200 than 100. The grain is also more like RG200 than RG100, unless I'm mistaken.

 

I wonder what the possibility would be for someone to respool the 50 speed movie neg film Kodak is manufacturing. They promote it as having extremely fine grain and high resolution. I wonder if it hs Remjet backing.

[25asa]

Yes it has the remjet backing, so its Seattle Film Works for developing. Kodak may have technology to produce finer grained films, but we'll never see it. There's a rumour floating around they are closing all traditional factories by 2007, which means no more film.

[ilkka_nissila]

100UC and 200UC differ in speed by 1 stop. 100UC gives punchier colors in return for the 1 stop loss in speed, or at least that's my perception without doing a formal comparison. You will definitely get worse results by underexposing 100UC by 1 stop, but overexposing 200UC gives finer grain. (If you don't believe that they are different, look at the density vs. exposure curve in the data sheet.)

 

Film development goes in the direction which is believed to lead into increased sales or profit. Faster films are liked by people who buy f/4-5.6 zooms and believe tripods are used for telescopes, not cameras. I don't mind the increase in speed, it's cool, but it would be nice to see a negative film which had gobs more detail and finer grain. Something like BW400CN but in colour. Mmm, yummy.

 

Manufacturers discontinue slow speed films probably because they lose money in continuing to make them.

 

As to why slow negative films don't sell, one is that at iso 100 people have the choice of a bunch of excellent slide films which don't have to be exposed for shadows. Another is that Kodak marketing makes people believe that faster films are actually better than slower ones. This effect is accentuated by the fact that faster films typically are more expensive, which makes people believe that they must be good because they're pricey. And when people have 4x6 prints made, it truly makes little difference if they choose iso 100 or 400, actually they may get better results with the faster film in general. Of course, enlarging or scanning the film reveals the grain differences, but few people do that.

 

I haven't shot a lot of slow negative films in the past 10 years simply because I use iso 100 slides mostly. And I'm precisely the kind of tripod carrying nerd that Kodak should target the slow films to. :-)

[phule]

<< In my neck of the woods, there is , as far as I know, only ONE actual camera store >>

 

You have access to the internet. There is no longer a "my neck of the woods."

 

Buy from B&H, store in your freezer, enjoy photography. :)

[joseph_albert]

<i>

There's a rumour floating around they are closing all traditional factories by 2007, which means no more film.

</i>

<p>

Someone better pass that rumor on to the Chief Technology Officer of Kodak, as he seems to have missed it, based on what he had to say about the future of film in

<a href = "http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/v2/v2futureOfFilm.jhtml"> this inteview.</a>

[joe_manthey1]

Richard Sehlin is the CTO of the Entertainment Imaging Division (i.e., Hollywood) of Kodak, not of Kodak overall. Perhaps the future of motion picture film is somewhat different than that of consumer/professional film. At any rate, I believe that interview is a couple years old, and times are a changin'.

[ilkka_nissila]

Well, it's not like they close all film just like that. First fewer products and so on.

[joseph_albert]

Times are changing, yes. But cinematic image capture is still with C-41 film for the large movie companies. 35mm film is the same thing just cut shorter and put into 135 film cartridges.

<p>

It is hard to predict how the future of photochemical film processes will unfold-- its demise could be slower or could be faster than folks "in the know" expect.

[sander_vesik]

Umm.. where does one get to read more about the Agfa 100 speed films being cancelled? Or is it just a stupid rumour?

[georg_kern]

There was a list spread from Agfa's US importer which listed the films available in the future. Vista 100 and Ultra were not mentioned (I guess Ultra 100 is quite expensive in production and does not pay off for Agfa). Optima 100 was listed, but it is said that the emulsion of Optima 100 is almost the same as Vista 100, just "riped" longer and more carefully, so I heavily doubt that they will produce new batches of Optima 100 (just sell what they have). In any way, it is a good idea to stock up, because there won't be further optimizations of the products.

[bill_tuthill]

If Ctein is right about 160S and 160C, Reala is dead because 160S

is lower contrast, and 160C has better blue sky saturation, Reala's

main weakness. Kodak UC100 is not a 100 speed film in my opinion.

So there's no longer a reason to shoot any 100 speed C-41 film.

What a shame many cameras can't read DX 160.

[ilkka_nissila]

Bill, come on, film speed is not a matter of opinion, it is measured by a standardized procedure.