Lomography 100 film, overexposure tolerance.

[zanxion72]

I had some weird experience with my first try of Lomography 100 film. I have bought one just to see the looks of it. I had it loaded on my Canon A-1 and intentionally overexposed it as I usually do with color negatives by rating it at ASA80.
The result was disappointing. Greenish cast, low definition, and somewhat washed out colors. I had it developed at a Fujilab. And now I wonder does that film go badly when overexposed, or/and the lab cannot not handle that emulsion correctly?
All Fujichrome films that I had processed with them came out flawless. Do you have any experience with these films?

[themoleman342]

I recently bought some as well because the price of a 3-pack makes it the cheapest 35mm film available on adorama or b&h. Lomography does not make its film. All of their offering are re-brandings and even those have changed before. People used to love the C-41 100 film because it was Ferrania Solaris. As far as I know, now it's Kodak KodaColor VR 100 Plus so your problems are probably with the Kodak.

My experience with the film was OK. Not great (wouldn't do anything serious with it) but also not terrible. I'd say my colors were a little green overall and the grain is WAY bigger than I expected for a 100 film. Looked more like a good 400 film to me. This was a sample I had taken with a Minolta 7000 + 4/35-70, camera set to iso100:

[Mos6502]

I have used a couple of packs so far, and have not had a problem.


car wash by berangberang, on Flickr


Austin by berangberang, on Flickr


vx5008 by berangberang, on Flickr

I agree the color rendition is slightly weird, certain colors come out much more subdued than others, but I have not experienced any sort of greenish cast.

[zanxion72]

Oh! Yes, it is grainy too, more that I expected. I guess I have been caught by surprise after using fujicolor superia 200 for long.
Perhaps that greenish look gives the impression of some overexposure. It also seems to lack some definition giving a soft focus look in some cases.
It is nice but way too greenish for my traits.

Thank you!

[themoleman342]

The difference in colors definitely could come down to development. I took my two rolls to a Walgreens (1 hr photo/pharmacy) and the person behind the counter genuinely looked confused by the 35mm canister. I even thought about grabbing them back at that moment. I believe they use a Fuji machine but my guess is that it's not well maintained. My impression has always been that the "budget" Kodak films give a more brownish look than green. Maybe this Kodacolor is a different animal.

[iangreenhalgh1]

Kodak Colorplus 200 is brownish, horrible stuff.

Green cast can come from the temp being off, I found that in my DIY C41 developing.

We can buy Agfa Vista 200 here for 1ukp, it's rebadged Fuji and excellent, similar to Superia. I bought 75 rolls as it comes out perfectly when I develop it in my kitchen sink.



If you can find this Agfa or any other Fuji, it's far, far better than the cheap Kodak or Ferrania, for me, Ferrania always has inconsistent colours and it doesn't keep well, even if refrigerated.

[zanxion72]

I think that I will stick with fuji. For general purpose this is what I have been using mostly so far and more or less I know in advance what I will get in the prints.
Lomography was too much for a surprise for me, and I believe that the fuji lab has a hard time processing it.

[iangreenhalgh1]

I concluded the same - stick with Fuji, it works consistently.

[FotoPete]

Yea! I always suspected something was off but always blamed my lack of experience with film. Even on sunny 16s, the lomo 100 turned out rather grainy.

Guess I won't miss the recent closure of the Lomo store here.

[buerokratiehasser]

I doubt that 25% overexposure makes any dent with C41 and lomography. I would worry were it slide film, but not CN.

The film may have been too old but that is pretty unlikely with asa 100, that is rather slow. Probably shoddy printing. C41 is standardised but their colors (negative -> positive print) are not, and different for every brand of film

Most C41 printers don't even allow for over- or underexposure, they "optimise" your image, if you send them night shot you will get pulled-up print which will look like daytime and fog (due to noise being pulled up)

[Excalibur]

You can still get very good results with three stops over exposure with colour neg film and I've done it many times testing lenses where I've accidentally forgot to change a lens from wide open to stop down (after using the same exposure reading for a previous lens stopped down). Mind you I usually use Fuji or Kodak film.

[skida]

I read somewhere (can't remember where) that someone checked the codes on the edge of Colour Plus and that led them to believe it was re-badged Kodak VR. Some of us here are old enough to remember when VR was launched with claims it was going to set new standards of sharpness and low grain, but the reality was something quite different and its vogue was short lived.