A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » General Photography » Film & Labs
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Antarctica print film



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old September 6th 04, 08:20 AM
James
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Last year i traveled to Antarctica, I shot only slide film (Fuji Velvia
& Provia). However I recommend that if your not good at exposure then
don't take slide film. My recommendation in Negative would be Fuji Reala
.. However it's a little more expensive than your standard Kodak
Gold/Fuji superia, but then hey, you just spent $3000USD on the boat
trip down, so why suddenly get stingy on the film!

tortoise wrote:
Well I just discovered that Kodak does not make the Royal Gold anymore.
I have emailed them about their high def film but wondered if anyone
has used it or has other suggestions?

I want to try several rolls of whatever film I use before next year
so I am not experimenting on the trip.

Thanks in advance for your help.

  #22  
Old September 6th 04, 08:20 AM
James
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Last year i traveled to Antarctica, I shot only slide film (Fuji Velvia
& Provia). However I recommend that if your not good at exposure then
don't take slide film. My recommendation in Negative would be Fuji Reala
.. However it's a little more expensive than your standard Kodak
Gold/Fuji superia, but then hey, you just spent $3000USD on the boat
trip down, so why suddenly get stingy on the film!

tortoise wrote:
Well I just discovered that Kodak does not make the Royal Gold anymore.
I have emailed them about their high def film but wondered if anyone
has used it or has other suggestions?

I want to try several rolls of whatever film I use before next year
so I am not experimenting on the trip.

Thanks in advance for your help.

  #23  
Old September 6th 04, 06:41 PM
tortoise
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

James-which airports did you fly through and did security do a hand-check of
your film instead of X-ray? We are limited to 55 pounds per person
on the charter flight from Santiago to Ushuia so I would like to leave
the lead bags at home if I can.

Thanks-Tracy
  #24  
Old September 6th 04, 06:41 PM
tortoise
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

James-which airports did you fly through and did security do a hand-check of
your film instead of X-ray? We are limited to 55 pounds per person
on the charter flight from Santiago to Ushuia so I would like to leave
the lead bags at home if I can.

Thanks-Tracy
  #25  
Old September 6th 04, 06:41 PM
tortoise
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

James-which airports did you fly through and did security do a hand-check of
your film instead of X-ray? We are limited to 55 pounds per person
on the charter flight from Santiago to Ushuia so I would like to leave
the lead bags at home if I can.

Thanks-Tracy
  #26  
Old September 7th 04, 04:18 PM
Ron Baird
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Greetings Mike,

I can appreciate the concern and questions around the new High Definition
film. I think that the naming was to help people understand what the film
could do over a name that implied 'the best = Royal Gold' High Definition
does a good job of that as the film does provide that and more. Since I am
not in the marketing group, I am sure they were trying to help by being more
descriptive.

Talk to you soon,

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company




"Michael Scarpitti" wrote in message
om...
(tortoise) wrote in message

. com...
Well I just discovered that Kodak does not make the Royal Gold anymore.
I have emailed them about their high def film but wondered if anyone
has used it or has other suggestions?

I want to try several rolls of whatever film I use before next year
so I am not experimenting on the trip.

Thanks in advance for your help.


It seems that Kodak, in yet another breath-takingly stupid move, has
renamed Royal Gold as "High Definition".

Kodak marketing never ceases to amaze me. It is beyond incompetent. We
need a new term for it.



  #27  
Old September 7th 04, 04:18 PM
Ron Baird
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Greetings Mike,

I can appreciate the concern and questions around the new High Definition
film. I think that the naming was to help people understand what the film
could do over a name that implied 'the best = Royal Gold' High Definition
does a good job of that as the film does provide that and more. Since I am
not in the marketing group, I am sure they were trying to help by being more
descriptive.

Talk to you soon,

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company




"Michael Scarpitti" wrote in message
om...
(tortoise) wrote in message

. com...
Well I just discovered that Kodak does not make the Royal Gold anymore.
I have emailed them about their high def film but wondered if anyone
has used it or has other suggestions?

I want to try several rolls of whatever film I use before next year
so I am not experimenting on the trip.

Thanks in advance for your help.


It seems that Kodak, in yet another breath-takingly stupid move, has
renamed Royal Gold as "High Definition".

Kodak marketing never ceases to amaze me. It is beyond incompetent. We
need a new term for it.



  #28  
Old September 7th 04, 06:29 PM
Elemental
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 11:18:57 -0400, Ron Baird wrote:

It seems that Kodak, in yet another breath-takingly stupid move, has
renamed Royal Gold as "High Definition".

Kodak marketing never ceases to amaze me. It is beyond incompetent. We
need a new term for it.


I can appreciate the concern and questions around the new High Definition
film. I think that the naming was to help people understand what the film
could do over a name that implied 'the best = Royal Gold' High Definition
does a good job of that as the film does provide that and more. Since I
am not in the marketing group, I am sure they were trying to help by being
more descriptive.


Ron,
until this posting, I was sure that Kodak HD film was marketing nonsense,
especially since Walmart and drugstores were involved (at least locally).
Maybe I might try a roll or two now. Leave the descriptions to spec
sheets.



  #29  
Old September 8th 04, 01:56 AM
James
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I'm Australian, So my flights consisted of

Sydney - Auckland
Auckland - Beunos Aires
Beunos Aires - Ushuia
antarctic voyage
Ushuia - BA
BA - Auckland
Auckland - Sydney

I had about 50 rolls of film, and the airport staff wouldn't hand check
it at any point. So it went through in total 6 hand baggage x-ray
scanners, and the film was not damaged at all. No signs of any fogging.
Mind you it was only 50 & 100 speed film, so i didn't expect any damage
to occur.

Cheers
James



tortoise wrote:
James-which airports did you fly through and did security do a hand-check of
your film instead of X-ray? We are limited to 55 pounds per person
on the charter flight from Santiago to Ushuia so I would like to leave
the lead bags at home if I can.

Thanks-Tracy

  #30  
Old September 8th 04, 05:01 AM
Michael Scarpitti
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Ron Baird" wrote in message ...
Greetings Mike,

I can appreciate the concern and questions around the new High Definition
film. I think that the naming was to help people understand what the film
could do over a name that implied 'the best = Royal Gold' High Definition
does a good job of that as the film does provide that and more. Since I am
not in the marketing group, I am sure they were trying to help by being more
descriptive.

Talk to you soon,

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company


The film is marvelous. It is, however, the THIRD name for the film
line in 15 years.

Ektar
Royal Gold
High Definition

Interestingly, both 'Ektar' and 'Royal' have a long history with Kodak
as brand names. 'Ektar' was used for lenses(!) and 'Royal' has been
used for many films (Royal Pan, Royal Ortho) and I think for some
equipment as well.

The point is that constantly changing the names is confusing. It is
also highly doubtful that Kodak needs TWO amateur color negative film
lines. In addition, the name 'Kodacolor' which had long been used has
been dropped, and we have instead a variety of names for Kodak's
'regular' line of films, which are now termed 'bright sun' or 'max'.

What's wrong with 'Kodacolor 400'? It's easy to remember (fancy that!)
and descriptive.

In addition to dropping the name 'Kodacolor', Kodak has also dropped
the name 'Ektacolor', which had been used for Pro films. 'Vericolor'
replaced it, to no great advantage.

Kodak has so many lines of color negative films that I cannot keep
them straight, so how is the layman consumer supposed to do it?

There are THREE lines of pro neg films (THREE!).

Portra has two subsets (NC and VC) and then there's Ultra.

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/profe...18.14.11&lc=en

In other parts of the world, there are others:

http://wwwin.kodak.com/IN/images/en/...Lflt_V1.12.pdf

How about this:

'Kodacolor' and 'Royal Color' for amateurs.


Fuhi's naming system seems better.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Kodak on Variable Film Development: NO! Michael Scarpitti In The Darkroom 276 August 12th 04 10:42 PM
Is it Copal or copal? Then what is it? Nick Zentena Large Format Photography Equipment 14 July 27th 04 03:31 AM
Insane new TSA rule for film inspection [email protected] 35mm Photo Equipment 94 June 23rd 04 05:17 AM
The first film of the Digital Revolution is here.... Todd Bailey Film & Labs 0 May 27th 04 08:12 AM
Develper for Delta-100 Frank Pittel In The Darkroom 8 March 1st 04 05:36 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.