1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Kodak Color Plus 200/Gold Color 200

Discussion in 'Everything Film' started by pocketshaver, Dec 6, 2019.

  1. pocketshaver

    pocketshaver In the Stop Bath

    Is there a secret with this film? Seriously.. is there?

    Looking at the negatives I got back in the mail, I noticed that its very random on how the individual frames look. you can have a group of 7 very dark, then suddenly they start coming out as neon bright. then suddenly back to dark.

    All when shot at same time, same day, same aperture, shutter speed, same room.
     
  2. neilt3

    neilt3 Well-Known Member

    Is the camera used on a regular basis , and if so , does other film come out fine ?
    Sounds like the cameras shutter might be acting up .
    I've sometimes used this film and never had a problem with it .
     
  3. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member


    Sounds like a broken camera.
     
  4. steveandthedogs

    steveandthedogs Well-Known Member

    I think it may need a CLA.

    S
     
  5. pocketshaver

    pocketshaver In the Stop Bath

    just had one this year. even had the shutter cleaned and retimed to the dial.
     
  6. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    I don't know what CLA stands for.

    The only way you can have different negative densities, frame by frame, is if there were different exposures. So, either you were wrong in saying the set exposure was unchanging (same aperture, exposure time, lighting, compensation) or the camera has a shutter fault or the lens has a sticking diaphram or both.

    A shutter fault usually doesn't just show up as variation in exposure time frame by frame but rather as non-uniformity in exposure across the frame. This will show up more for shorter exposures (less than flash sync time) where both curtains act together than long exposures where the curtains work one at a time. If the calibration is wrong you'll get incorrect exposures based on settings. If the shutter is erratic on long exposures - several seconds- then you can time this yourself as the difference between 2" and 4" is very obvious but you should be able to tell over a wide range of exposure times by holding the camera facing the light with the back open, wind on and fire - you'll see a flash of light you can judge if it is of consistent duration even down to less than 1". This is a basic before-you-buy-a-camera test.

    A sticking diaphragm you can test if the camera is an SLR. The camera holds the lens at full aperture for focussing and metering, then the aperture closes as the shutter is released. The spring action is quite strong. If you dismount the lens, set it to F22 (or whatever minimum is) and manually move the control pin you should feel if it is moving smoothly down to F22 under light pressure and that it returns smoothly under obvious spring pressure. You can also try it on camera with the stop-down lever - all this does is move the pin with the lens mounted.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2019
  7. steveandthedogs

    steveandthedogs Well-Known Member

    I may have missed it, but what is the camera?

    S

    ps CLA = clean, lubricate and adjust.
     
  8. pocketshaver

    pocketshaver In the Stop Bath

    FTBn QL two of the lil buggers.

    They work fine.

    Noticing that the color plus 200 has an issue with lots of green in one frame. Needs to have a good dose of white, grey, blue in the frame. Other wise seems to get washy looking
     
  9. neilt3

    neilt3 Well-Known Member

    Do you use other film in it that comes out fine ?
    How have you determined they work fine ?
    Underexposed colour film when bumped up for printing at the lab can come out as you discribe .
     
  10. pocketshaver

    pocketshaver In the Stop Bath

    seeing comparison photos online that it likes to get dark in less then studio optimal lighting
     
  11. neilt3

    neilt3 Well-Known Member

    This still doesn't answer how you're determined your cameras are fine .
    Have you used other film in them in similar lighting conditions that has come out fine ?

    What you discribe is happening is most likely caused by underexposure .
    You need to determine what's causing it .
    1; is the meter in the camera working proper .
    If there is point source lighting in the shot , this can fool the meter .
    2; is the camera exposing correctly at the indicated settings , shutter speed and aperture ?
    3; have you set the ISO on the camera correctly ?

    If you find it is constantly under exposing , soot a roll at ISO 100 and check the results .

    I use Fomapan 200 in my large format cameras and I take a meter reading at ISO 125 as the results are much better .

    Without more information from you we can't determine on where the fault is .
    A lot of shots online are by the lomo crowd , often under or over exposing for "creative" effects , or using out if date and badly stored film for the same reason .
    You can't use these as a comparison .
     
  12. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    What is that supposed to mean?
     
  13. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    I'm with you on this. It reads as if frame-by-frame exposures are all over the shop. You can't get frame by frame changes in density in a single film used with the same (manual) camera settings with the under fixed studio lighting with the same subject unless something is broken. If the film is at fault (be it old film or not) it is highly unlikely that density changes would coincide exactly with frame markings. It does read as if the film is grossly underexposed.
     
  14. neilt3

    neilt3 Well-Known Member


    Reading the original post again , he states ;
    So it seems that a meter reading had been taken at some point , then every subsequent frame shot the same .
    Regardless of different amounts of light in the area .
    Unless it's an office full of even light , then all evening venues I've been , pubs clubs etc , different areas require different exposure .
    It does seem like user era to me .
    But with a lack of information and a photo of the negatives on a light table , it's hard to say .
     
  15. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    In the other thread (film labs) the story becomes even less clear. Sounds like the same set of negs addressed as a processing error.
     
  16. neilt3

    neilt3 Well-Known Member

    Sounds like his started two threads on the same issue .
    Without answering questions asked or posting an image of the negatives it impossible to answer .
    I've had a set of negatives retuned that came out under developed .
    I knew it wasn't my fault ( or my cameras fault) as even the print on the rebait ( Kodak and they type) were barely readable .
    It turned out one of the nozzles had blocked in the unit .
    It was only when they developed mine that they found the fault , film they developed earlier they put down to the photographer/camera .
    When mine came out bad , they knew it was their fault !

    The thing is though , if it was their fault when developed , all the images would come out the same . The rack that they come out different makes it likely that the problem is caused when taken , wrong exposure or faulty kit .

    Without seeing the negs though , it's just guessing .
     

Share This Page