Luminar (Kodak Aerocolor Iv) really is a lovely film.
It's a shame Kodak themselves never sold it in individual rolls, but I guess that was because they were marking up their current offerings as high as they could.
BenjaminSmith wrote:
All shots on a Canon Populaire with lens and film noted in photo caption. Still trying to nail development technique with Cinestill D96 monobath processing (it's meant to be a no-brainer, right?)
FYI films like Acros, Delta, Tmax need double the developing time in DF96 Monobath to clear the base fog.
Desmolicious wrote:
Luminar (Kodak Aerocolor Iv) really is a lovely film.
It's a shame Kodak themselves never sold it in individual rolls, but I guess that was because they were marking up their current offerings as high as they could.
I've shot two rolls with it over the past year but wasn't happy with the lab scans as the colors were very unnatural on most shots, but it turns out that's common due to the lack of orange mask. I now have my own scanner so will rescan the negatives to see if they come out better; I was able to color-correct the JPEG scans from my lab but it would be better to rescan.
I've shot two rolls with it over the past year but wasn't happy with the lab scans as the colors were very unnatural on most shots, but it turns out that's common due to the lack of orange mask. I now have my own scanner so will rescan the negatives to see if they come out better; I was able to color-correct the JPEG scans from my lab but it would be better to rescan.
I had no issues, but that is because I scan the film myself, and set the WB for each unique film type (saving it as a preset). I do that by using the WB dropper in a piece of the unexposed film.
It sounds like your lab did not accommodate for this film and just used a generic setting that they use for Kodak/Fuji etc.
Desmolicious wrote:
[
I had no issues, but that is because I scan the film myself, and set the WB for each unique film type (saving it as a preset). I do that by using the WB dropper in a piece of the unexposed film.
It sounds like your lab did not accommodate for this film and just used a generic setting that they use for Kodak/Fuji etc.
That's probably right, although I've heard complaints from others about colors that seem far off. Here are a few examples of lab-scanned shots of Aerocolor IV:
The gravel path in this one was actually grey in real life but came out brick-red in their scan:
bjhurley wrote:
That's probably right, although I've heard complaints from others about colors that seem far off. Here are a few examples of lab-scanned shots of Aerocolor IV:
The gravel path in this one was actually grey in real life but came out brick-red in their scan:
Yeah, the lab did not use a scanning conversion setting for the correct film. They most probably don't even have one.
If you want you can send me a film strip and I will scan/convert it w my Aerocolor IV preset.
Desmolicious wrote:
Luminar (Kodak Aerocolor Iv) really is a lovely film.
It's a shame Kodak themselves never sold it in individual rolls, but I guess that was because they were marking up their current offerings as high as they could.
It is a pretty nice film, sometimes-strange-color-casts aside. I have shot some on 120; will post those up soon.
