I dont know if Agfa know or not, if they do know, they obviously not too concerned, since the Rollei product is a third party source, id say anyone using this film in a professional way are buying it directly from Agfa in belgium, it appears to be marketed for aerial photography, but Agfa only seem to be supplying master rolls of the stuff to third partys.
Originally Posted by Alpenhause
The odd thing is it still seems to be used extensively with aerial photography and one Aerial photographic website ive visited sells CR200 solely for this very purpose, you would think they would be the first to complain about any issues with this film, yet they seem to just put up with it perhaps?
I really would like to get to the bottom of this once and for all, as it would be very sad to see this emulsion fall off the scene if sales decline.
I just cant wait to shoot some! But no way in hell am i going to buy the Digibase CR200, i want to get it from Wittiner-Cinetec.
CR-200 is the product name given to the Agfa Aviphot Chrome 200 E-6 film sold by Maco/Rollei, I am thinking the aerial photography website is obtaining its Agfa Aviphot Chrome 200 directly from Agfa, Agfa does show this film available in aerial camera film sizes and other sizes.
If the aerial photography website had wound up with some "Yellow" film they would be contacting Agfa right away and would quarantine the offending batch number, these folks would not tolerate bad film for even a minute because of the high cost of a roll of 9 1/2" X 200 foot roll charateristic of high end aerial cameras, these rolls I am sure are well over $300 per roll?
I am thinking only the Aviphot Chrome 200 which was purchased in "Master" roll size by Maco/Rollei is afflicted with this "Yellow" problem.
I think there is an excellent chance this "Yellow" problem is only seen on the "CR- 200" sold by Maco/Rollei, I am not for certain about this and have asked around to aerial film supply houses about this "Yellow" problem and they kind of did not really answer..... They may have thought my inquiry was a bit absurd.
It is amazing though that this "Yellow" problem pops up on a lot of forums and the Problem seems to be limited to the CR-200 from Maco/Rollei.
Perhaps members interested in this forum thread should flood Macodirect.de with inquiries about this film and see what happens?
It could get interesting real fast or..... they may be reluctant to respond.... One way to find out though!
Hopefully Maco/Rollei will round up all this "Yellow" film and take it out of circulation and obtain some new master rolls to cut down, package and sell, this forum thread has just got to be rather embarassing for them.
I think it's interesting that there seem to be different degrees of the "yellow problem"; a number of people have gotten batches of the Maco/Rollei packaged film that were somewhere between "very warm" and "a little yellowish", while others have had film that was really severely yellow-skewed. Whatever happened to this film, it doesn't seem to have been an on-or-off problem but something with variable effects from sample to sample.
It'd be nice to see a correctly balanced version available in rolls, but considering the grain I'd get much more interested if it were available in 120 than in 35mm. Better yet, someone bring back RSX II 50!
San Diego, CA, USA
The lady of the house has to be a pretty swell sort of person to put up with the annoyance of a photographer.
-The Little Technical Library, _Developing, Printing, And Enlarging_
RSX II 50 sounds like a great film, but ive never used it.
Originally Posted by ntenny
I think its worth shooting this film, as Alpenhause feels his film has no significant grain. Again, the grain issue may be due to the faults found in the CR200.
Its also possible that Wittner-Cinetec may be able to cut it in 120 format from a master roll, but they probably would only do this if they had enough demand, you can already get CR200 in 120 format, so lets hope that we see some faultless stock from Rollei soon, although i expect we could be waiting a very long time.
Type 120 is a conversion more complicated than type 135, as well concerning machinery as well concerning raw-stocks.
Originally Posted by Nzoomed
And a master roll from Agfa is a huge amount of film...
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Yes sorry, im really trying to refer to a bulk roll cut down from a master roll.
Originally Posted by AgX
What width film would Wittner be obtaining i wonder?
They are obviously cutting down and perforating a much wider roll of film, they currently sell 35mm perforated and unperforated, along with 16mm and super8 formats.
If their rolls of film that they are cutting down are wider than 35mm, then chances are its possible to make 120 format.
This brings into question about how much film Rollei are buying, a master roll is a very large amount of film indeed, and if all the CR200 is from the same faulty master roll, then there is a huge amount of the stuff to get through!
Another thing i should mention is that CR200 is the same film used in the Rollei crossbird cameras, has anyone shot one of these cameras and processed in E6, and with what results?
Hey man, you hit this on the head, very accurate assessment of this phenomenon, the results have definately varied regarding CR-200.
Originally Posted by ntenny
Makes one wonder just how much film was actually purchased by Maco/Rollei..... It would appear some was good and some was not.
I wonder if AGFA Belgium could be talked into producing one more run of AGFA ULTRA 100 Color negative film, That would just Haul Ass! Kodak Ektar 100 is good but not as good as the AGFA ULTRA 100 was....
Ektar 100 is definately finer grain but that AGFA ULTRA 100 had the best of the best color rendition. I still have ten rolls left and would not even think of selling them for even 25 bucks a roll
Last edited by Alpenhause; 06-17-2013 at 12:52 AM. Click to view previous post history.
I'm piling in here way late and without having used any of this film, but having followed quite a few yellow Agfa arguments on the forums. I think (and apologies if I'm rehashing someone else's point here) that a couple of things are worth keeping in mind:
- some people get beautiful neutral results from CR200 with no yellow tint whatsoever (I have seen it in person)
- some people get a disgusting yellow cast, varying somewhat in intensity between sufferers (I've seen nasty scans, unprojectable and uncorrectable digitally)
- the yellow cast does not seem to be correctable by filtering the objective lens
There seems to me, from my unscientific observation of forum complaints, to be a correlation between people getting yellow results and using the cheaper E6 kit chemistry, i.e. powders and/or blix kits. Those getting perfect results are either running 6-step Fuji or Kodak chemistry or going to labs who do so.
The reason we see no complaints from the aerial surveillance mob is that they process huge quantities of film in high quality bulk chemistry kept in tight process control. It probably works flawlessly for them.
My hypothesis: there is an issue either with this film or (more likely) with the cheaper chemistry kits that manifests only when the two are combined. An incompatibility as it were, which probably results in incomplete bleaching or maybe over-reversal (e.g. re-activation of some sensitivity in the highlights, causing yellowed Dmin), or blix-preservative (blix not being part of the documented E6 standard process) tested only with Fuji+Kodak films reacts with the Agfa, or something else entirely. I could guess until I'm blue in the face, but the Kodak and Fuji process instructions both give guidance on possible causes of various casts.
So if you've tried this film, a) did it work cleanly and b) which brand of chemistry did you use?
These are interesting thoughts. But... why was that yellowing not reported in times of the Agfa RSXII 200?
Basically chemistries can be of influence. Agfa even warns that with one of their current C-41 flms coloured streaking can occur with some types of (non-Agfa) bleaches if they are used outside their limits.
Homebrew may be a solution...
If you have a larger stock of this somehow aged film, and you do insist in using it, I would propose a homebrew of the chemicals. This will the only way to get it projected without major color mismatches.
The blue sensitive, yellow forming layers are on the top of the film, if you have a yellow tendency in the final slide the yellow densities are too low. So you have to restrain development of the upper layers during FD, in order to keep more silverbromide/iodide for the color developing step and the forming of dyes therein.
It will be quite a fiddeling, to get a result without disturbing the color balance too much, but try to use less sulphite in the FD, less KSCN, a pitch more Iodide and a maybe pitch more bromide. Do not overdevelop the film at all, a kind of slight pull process (-1/3 till -1/2 aperture) would be a benefit.
In the CD use less iodide, probably you will have to readjust the pH in the color developer a bit, use a bit less NaOH sol. than usual.
Do this only if you have enough time / chemicals / film and patience