royal gold vs just gold?

J

jano

Evil Bokeh
Local time
7:26 AM
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
1,203
Location
Southern California
View My Gallery
In searching for a nice color print film a few months ago, I read about Kodak's Royal Gold 200 being a very good, cheap one. Of course, it has been discontinued and I couldn't find it anywhere. However, while at costco this weekend, I spotted a whole box of Kodak Gold 200, expires 4/2006. So I bought me one package (includes 5 rolls of 24 and two "free" with 36) for under $10. What the heck. 🙂

So what's the difference between Gold 200 and Royal Gold 200? I tried searching on the net, but couldn't really find anything, other than people discussing the merits of RG, and wondering if 100UC or HD were the same thing. *shrug*

Jano
 
Okay, just found a few tidbits dispersed across this internet quagmire: plain gold is slightly more saturated than RG. Both films are discontinued, anyway, so this is probably all just a waste of time for me. ah, well, off to find another print film.

Ideas for other film? I had tried out a dozen rolls of reala, but the results were inconsistent. What other films should I try?

Chris, I live in southern CA, so as much as I'd like to go, it's probably a bit too far. However, I've been known to randomly take flights to remote areas, but typically there's some degree of motivation behind the travel (READ: members of the fairer gender -- last one was a flight to lake tahoe to watch this girl give an amazing classical guitar concert, was worth it, as I left with her phone number 😀 😀).
 
Royal is newer and it has finer grain. It is on the Kodak website.
 
Jon: Jano said he had inconsistent results with Reala, so that's why he's shopping around.

Jano: Was the inconsistency due to film development (my assumption) or printing? Maybe it was just a lab thing? Or improperly stored film?

Maybe Superia would be an option, though I don't know if they make an ISO 200 emulsion.
 
Don't quote me on this, but Kodak Royal Gold was originally called 'Ektar', and was Kodak's pro-am line of film. It has finer grain, and more natural colors than plain gold, as was previously mentioned. It was an amazing film, and I got rolls of fantastic shots with it.
 
Before it was discontinued, I and a photographer friend of mine both standardized on Royal Gold 200 as our color print film of choice because of the previously mentioned reasons: finer grain and more natural colors than the plain Gold series, especially skin tones.

Currently, I don't have a "go to" color print film, I'm still experimenting and looking for one.

--Warren
 
Jon, Trius: I bought a bunch of rolls of reala from B&H last year and stored them in the mini fridge/freezer here. I just never got consistent results. Sometimes I'd have these wonderfully accurate colors, and sometimes these very funky blues or greens or even yellows, sometimes very drab and grainy, other times creamy and pastel, etc. At one point some of the results actually started to look consistent, but the images looked like plastic toy sculptures instead of photographs (very weird). I think it's mostly the colors that threw me off. I tried a few at 100, and the rest at 80. 80 definitley gave better results. My favorite film thus far has been K's 400UC, but I'd like to find a 100 or 200 speed film as well and maybe something I can get locally instead of ordering from B&H.

I had a couple rolls of superia way back when, may give it a try. Next up will be K's UC and/or HD stuff. But I'm a bit wary big yellow will change those around again soon. *shrug* Or maybe just skip print film and go to slide film *shrug*

Jano
 
I also liked the Royal Gold films. I have been using Kodak Portra 400VC and 160VC with very good results. Make sure you get the VC designation (Vivid Color) or the colors won't quite "pop."

I also send the film out for Kodak Perfect Touch processing. The developing and prints they provide are MUCH better than the local quickie labs.
 
Last edited:
Kodak 400UC is by far my favorite color film right now. Low, low grain, great speed, and the colors are rich without being at all cartoonish. it's also $5 a roll.

Costco will be carrying only Fuji from now on, fyi. So lots and lots of superia, I guess.

If you don't like Reala, then it's pretty tough. The 100UC from Kodak is actually quite grainy. Once you go back into the Fuji and Kodak consumer lines you see a lot more contrast, which can really block up your colors.

I don't know what to suggest. Other than shooting some slides 🙂
allan
 
the Kodak 400 HD - previously known as Royal Gold 400 - is nice, but kinda expensive at $4 or so for 24 exposure rolls. And it's actually quite grainy, I find.

Having said that...apparently it's very, very nice at EI 200 🙂 that would certainly help with the grain.

allan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
  • Article Article
The Most Technologically Advanced Rangefinder 35s, Part 2: Everything But Leica!
2
Replies
30
Views
7K
hilltime
hilltime
N
Sorting the cheap Kodak films
Replies
3
Views
1K
charjohncarter
charjohncarter
Back
Top Bottom