KODAK VERICOLOR II VPL 120 - 220 FILM

[BeBu Lamar]

There are much fewer films available today and they are significantly more expensive but when I shoot film I would go for fresh film. I don't shoot B&W but I believe there are more B&W film than color. I can still buy fresh color negative film and color transparency film so there is no need to use expired film.

[glen_h]

I mostly try to use fresh, or at least bought by me and kept refrigerated, color film.

 

I never had any new VPL, or a good use for it. I think I got it along with something else,

but maybe it was just a low enough price. Like black and white films, fast color films

go bad faster than slower ones. I don't know that there is a replacement for VPL.

 

(For many years my favorite was VPS in 35mm. Portra 160 seems a fine replacement to me.)

 

But in many sizes, there is no new film, though in some there is hand spooled at high prices.

 

I have a 116 camera that I got from my grandfather in 1968, when I could easily find film

for it. I have some VP116 that might be 40 years old, and still works well. If I could buy

new 116 film for maybe $6 or so per roll, I might. I have a few rolls of VP122, which is

even less likely to make a comeback.

 

When I am out with an old camera and old film, I usually also have a DSLR along, which

I use for the shots that I really want to work. The film camera more for fun.

[rodeo_joe1]

Note especially the smooth ends to the characteristic curves in film, vs. the sharp corners in digital.

Huh?

Where can one view such a 'sharp cornered' digital characteristic curve, pray tell?

 

If you're talking about the default diagonal line across a histogram map - that's not a characteristic curve.

 

Also, a tone curve is given to a digital image before you even see it. Both RAW and Jpeg files will have had a gamma and contrast curve (possibly S-shaped) applied to it. A linear, straight-from-the-sensor image would look very dark and lacking in contrast.

 

Unpredictability in art?

How many painters mix their pallette in total darkness and paint blindfolded?

Maybe I shouldn't have suggested that; some plonker will do it!

And in some cases it looks as if they already have.

Edited February 27, 2020 by rodeo_joe|1

[glen_h]

It may or may not be straight in between, but digital saturates like a brick wall.

 

There will be a sharp corner to a horizontal line at the top.

 

Film works less well at the bottom, but there is usually a somewhat smooth curve into the

horizontal at the bottom. Again with digital it goes to zero and then flat.

 

If someone wants to trade me new film for my old film, I will take the offer.

 

Some new VP116 and VP122 would be nice.

 

Also some new Panatomic-X instead of the old stuff would be nice to have.

[BeBu Lamar]

It may or may not be straight in between, but digital saturates like a brick wall.

 

There will be a sharp corner to a horizontal line at the top.

 

Film works less well at the bottom, but there is usually a somewhat smooth curve into the

horizontal at the bottom. Again with digital it goes to zero and then flat.

 

If someone wants to trade me new film for my old film, I will take the offer.

 

Some new VP116 and VP122 would be nice.

 

Also some new Panatomic-X instead of the old stuff would be nice to have.

 

My digital images don't have a lot of saturation unless I crank it up in post. Why would one want to trade new film for your old film?

[glen_h]

(snip)

Why would one want to trade new film for your old film?

 

Joe keeps asking why people like to use old expired film.

 

I learned young from my father about buying recently expired film for half price,

which is most likely as good as it was a few weeks before. Even so, you choose

the least outdated in the bin. (Even better from a store that kept it cold the whole time.)

 

There are a few cases where I really want to try old film. One is that I want to see how

well Panatomic-X works at 80 years. The oldest I have every tried had close to zero

fog, so I might like to see it even older.

 

But if I had the choice between old VPL and new VPL, I would choose new, if the prices

were close. As far as I know, there is no new VPL, though.

 

I do have a bunch of rolls of expired 35mm Kodacolor that came with something else.

I wouldn't have bought them, but also haven't thrown them away. I am really not very

interested in using them, even for the fun of seeing what strange colors might come out.

[ben_hutcherson]

I routinely use expired film. Some films I want just aren't available fresh(Plus-X). Sometimes too I just don't get around to shooting it before it expires. When I go to the freezer to get out film for a day of shooting, if for example I'm looking at a couple of rolls of Tri-X that expired in October of 2019 or some that's still in date, I mostly will grab the stuff from October. I'd defy anyone to see the difference between the two, especially since film goes in the freezer as soon as I get it and doesn't come out until I'm ready for it.

 

Heck, not to long ago, I bought a brick(4x 5 packs, or 20 rolls) of 120 EPP. It was cold stored from new and expired in 2006. Yes, even by 2006 standard, it's an ancient film, but it has a certain "look" that I can't get from any other film and is just right for certain subjects. Kodak kept cranking out this ancient stuff until 2010, despite the E100G/E100GX/E100VS line-up being technically better in pretty much every other way.

 

Back in the mid-2000s when serious pro film was doing its swan song, the local store had the big refrigerator behind the counter with anything imaginable in it. There was also a box out in the middle of the store that had the recently expired stuff, and it was priced at 1/2 retail. I cut my B&W teeth, and MF in particular, on film from that box. There again, something that had only been moved out of the refrigerator a few days or few weeks prior was completely fine.

[rodeo_joe1]

It may or may not be straight in between, but digital saturates like a brick wall.

 

There will be a sharp corner to a horizontal line at the top.

Sorry Glen, but that's just nonsense, and shows a complete lack of experience with a good digital camera and shooting RAW.

 

Here's a straight out-of-camera Jpeg, which shows a great 'dynamic range'. Every detail of the shadowed black hull to the sunlit white hatch cover is visible.

Below is what's captured by the sensor before any processing. You can see that there's even more highlight detail to be got, and only two or three specular metallic reflections are saturated. As they would be on any film.

It's very dark and green, due to the bayer pattern.

Here it is again colour corrected.

And finally, with a gamma and tone curve applied to closely match the Jpeg.

This is the tone curve that had to.be applied.

See any sharp corners on that smooth curve? Because I don't.

Edited February 28, 2020 by rodeo_joe|1

[eddy_d]

Huh?

Where can one view such a 'sharp cornered' digital characteristic curve, pray tell?

 

If you're talking about the default diagonal line across a histogram map - that's not a characteristic curve.

 

Also, a tone curve is given to a digital image before you even see it. Both RAW and Jpeg files will have had a gamma and contrast curve (possibly S-shaped) applied to it. A linear, straight-from-the-sensor image would look very dark and lacking in contrast.

 

Unpredictability in art?

How many painters mix their pallette in total darkness and paint blindfolded?

Maybe I shouldn't have suggested that; some plonker will do it!

And in some cases it looks as if they already have.

 

 

 

And they are probabaly making money from it. Many people like film equally or better then digital it seems you are always knocking film.in a film forum Does digital still get blwon out highlights? if so they should fix that and I am surprised they have not in this day and age. Every digital camera coming out every month or year is the technology is already obsolete. Didi

It does seem contradictory, that (most) film users espouse a love of 'skill' and 'control' that supposedly can only be got from using film. Yet they'll use outdated or badly stored film, cross-processing, 'pushing' C-41 or E6, etc. All of which give results that are, at best sub-standard, and at worst totally unpredictable.

 

Of course they'll claim it's arty; when in fact it's actually a pretty lazy and haphazard way of doing things. Requiring less skill than the use of PhotoShop that they noisily despise.

 

 

Lazy? and others consider photo shop lazy. Get it right the first time as they say. Photoshop more skill. Do you like to make your digital photos look like film in photoshop? Why? why not shoot film if that is the case or get it right the first time in the camera.

 

And these painters you talk about Are probabaly making money from it. Traditional art is unpredictable and digital is controllable. Many people like film equally or better then digital and it seems you are always knocking film.in a film forum Just because you don't like it or use it doesn't mean others dont. Does digital still get blown out highlights? If so they should fix that and I am surprised they have not in this day and age. Every digital camera coming out every month or year the technology is already obsolete. What fun is seeing what you shoot every single time you press the shutter.? If there was no such thing as fixing it in post/photoshop would you think digital is still better then film or mixing paint painting blindfolded as you say?

[rodeo_joe1]

And they are probabaly making money from it. Many people like film equally or better then digital it seems you are always knocking film.in a film forum Does digital still get blwon out highlights? if so they should fix that and I am surprised they have not in this day and age. Every digital camera coming out every month or year is the technology is already obsolete. Didi

 

 

 

Lazy? and others consider photo shop lazy. Get it right the first time as they say. Photoshop more skill. Do you like to make your digital photos look like film in photoshop? Why? why not shoot film if that is the case or get it right the first time in the camera.

 

And these painters you talk about Are probabaly making money from it. Traditional art is unpredictable and digital is controllable. Many people like film equally or better then digital and it seems you are always knocking film.in a film forum Just because you don't like it or use it doesn't mean others dont. Does digital still get blown out highlights? If so they should fix that and I am surprised they have not in this day and age. Every digital camera coming out every month or year the technology is already obsolete. What fun is seeing what you shoot every single time you press the shutter.? If there was no such thing as fixing it in post/photoshop would you think digital is still better then film or mixing paint painting blindfolded as you say?

You've obviously not understood a single word of the above discussion.