bmattock
Veteran
Bingo! Dingdingdingding, we have a winner! Or rather, a loser.
This is terrible film. Sold under the Kroger imprint in US grocery stores. Might be sold elsewhere. Look for the 'Made in Italy' label on the box.
It's crap.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
Check with the Lomo crowd. Evidently they made a batch of C41 film that was 'designed" to be shot through the backing of the film. The result was truly weird colors! Obviously they had a great deal of problem convincing the manufacturer to spool the film in reverse! Once they found out that the order was for 150 000+ rolls, they quickly changed their mind. Dont now the name or designation of the film - but someone well versed in Lomography probably will.
hans voralberg
Veteran
For simplicity sake just underexposed Superia 800 or 1600, you'll get truly horrendous results. I think you might actually dump them after seeing them 
Gaspar
Established
Kirlkand signature gave me the worse grain ever for a 200 iso but the colour was not bad. Velvia as given me some outlandish cast but generally it is excellent (or terrible from your point of view)
mwooten
light user
If you can do MF, I've got a couple of rolls of Fuji NPS that is dated 2002-4. The only cold it has seen is when the power fails in the winter time.
--michael
--michael
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
It's a technique known as redscale and can be done at home.
You need to respool the film so that the backing layer is facing the shutter.
Or, as Tom says, you can order it ready made back-to-front from Lomography.
sienarot
Well-known
I can usually find something good about any film. The only exception is Fuji Superia 200. I can't find anything I like about that film.
Spider67
Well-known
Crossprocessing diapostive is sure to give you strange results.
In BW I vote for Lucky 400
In BW I vote for Lucky 400
Merkin
For the Weekend
Wow, thanks everyone. Keep the suggestions rolling! I am going to check my local Kroger to see if they have any ferrania, particularly 800 speed. I am also considering some Fujicolor Press 800, as the grain is just about perfect when underexposed a stop.
I want to avoid cross processing (either way), mainly because I feel like it is way overdone, and I don't want to be mistaken for a lomographer. I don't use the 'rules of lomography' when I use my holgas, and, by extension, I don't want to be mistaken for someone who uses expired cross processed film just because the Lomo Hipsters say it is cool, even if expired cross processed film would be the perfect thing for this project.
I don't want to use velvia for a couple of reasons: First, because I am doing this project on the cheap. Second, bad things always happen when I use velvia. Third, ive come to the conclusion that I don't really like the 'velvia look' any more, even though i was stupid for it back in high school.
I know what you mean about comics in bright, supersaturated colors. That is very true of modern comic books. I am going for an old yellowed, dog eared, vintage comic book kind of look, when the color process was far from as good as it is today.
I want to avoid cross processing (either way), mainly because I feel like it is way overdone, and I don't want to be mistaken for a lomographer. I don't use the 'rules of lomography' when I use my holgas, and, by extension, I don't want to be mistaken for someone who uses expired cross processed film just because the Lomo Hipsters say it is cool, even if expired cross processed film would be the perfect thing for this project.
I don't want to use velvia for a couple of reasons: First, because I am doing this project on the cheap. Second, bad things always happen when I use velvia. Third, ive come to the conclusion that I don't really like the 'velvia look' any more, even though i was stupid for it back in high school.
I know what you mean about comics in bright, supersaturated colors. That is very true of modern comic books. I am going for an old yellowed, dog eared, vintage comic book kind of look, when the color process was far from as good as it is today.
russianRF
Fed 5C User
Excuse me, but aren't you making the same mistake as Lomo hipsters here, but in reverse? They shoot a certain type of film not because they're familiar with it or because it's right for their work, but because it's "cool" to do so. YOU are refusing to shoot a certain type of film, even though it might fit perfectly for your application, because shooting the film offends YOUR sense of what is "cool" (for you, not being hipster = cool).
If Lomography style film is what will get you to where you want to be -- and I think it's a good bet it will -- you should keep on doing what you've been doing: ignore the hipsters and use the best film for your job, reguardless of what they're doing.
I, personally, would not confuse interesting, weirdly-colored "lomo-esque" images of cosplay characters with hipster lomo-esque shots of cats sniffing at the lens. Remember that composition and content are much more important to your artistic message (or the hipsters' lack of a message) then whatever kind of film or camera you're using. I'd bet that for every "eww he's just a lomographer" comment you'd over hear, you'd find TEN people saying "see! THAT is the sort of thing Lomography makes interesting/appealing."
Merkin
For the Weekend
It isn't really a matter of what I think is cool. If I were only shooting what I thought was cool, I wouldn't be considering color film. Unfortunately, I don't think this project would work in black and white, at least not as well.
Most people judge an image they see in about two seconds, at least as far as an inital like/dislike response goes. I fear that regardless of the content, if I xproed my images, an unacceptable number of people would simply dismiss my images as 'just yet another idiot xproing because it is trendy." To me, that is not an effective way of making my images stand out. I have nothing against anyone who uses various techniques and equipment that have been lumped under the 'lomography' term, if they are using the various techniques and equipment to fulfill a unique vision. I don't, however, want to engage in any xpro myself.
Also, as far as "(not being a hipster = cool)" goes, I do exhibit a number of hipsterish tendencies, particularly my taste in obscure rock bands that no one has ever heard of. The thing that is not cool to me is blindly following trends, and the 'lomography' scam has FAR too many people drinking the E6 kool-aid.
retro
Well-known
Processing 35mm movie film via C-41 might work. I have a bunch
of old "RGB" film around here someplace. Remember that? It's
really Kodak 5247 I think.
There's also the old Scotch Chrome 1000. It was a super grainy
E6 film but it could be cross-processed via C-41 if you can find
some.
Both of the above were the worst color films I remember using
back in the day.
of old "RGB" film around here someplace. Remember that? It's
really Kodak 5247 I think.
There's also the old Scotch Chrome 1000. It was a super grainy
E6 film but it could be cross-processed via C-41 if you can find
some.
Both of the above were the worst color films I remember using
back in the day.
bmattock
Veteran
The Kroger stuff will be sold with the Kroger name brand on it - it won't say Ferrania. But the box says 'Made in Italy' or 'Product of Italy' and that's the stuff. I only tried the 200. Truly, it stinketh. Grain like golfballs, fugly colors, and reminds me of old 1970's suburban lawn parties where everyone plays lawn darts and the kids roller skate in the street with those steel-wheel skates that need a key to go over your street shoes. Get me a Coors and put a brat on the barbecue for me.
ChrisLivsey
Veteran
Not well versed in Lomography but I stumbled across this from another site.
http://www.lomography.com/redscalefilm/
then this for examples:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/redscale/
Last edited:
crawdiddy
qu'est-ce que c'est?
I agree. I shot some Scotch 3200 ISO film once, and the grain was marble-sized. So ugly it was almost attractive.