NEW FILM // Kodak Gold 120!!! 

Thanks tons Marc. We're planning to do a bit more of an actual review and talk through the differences in another video. But we really apprciate the compliments. Look at the blues as well....you can see the differences there for sure.

Actually a good point.

The price increases are definite bummers. Supply chain issues are real and a lot of other things. It's painful. Like thinking back to when gas was a dollar but now it's $6 per gallon. Totally sucks. On the other hand, they also could have not released a new film, but they did, which we think is great progress in the film community and offering it lower than the pro-level films, which is great. So we're stoked to have it as an option vs another film being discontinued....

Everything gets more expensive. Diesel is now also sold at a price at which ones premium petrol was.

Brent, YES be DAMN grateful. How old are you? Cut down on your Starbucks.

@@linjicakonikon7666 And avocado toast as well, right?

Glad it was helpful. I think we overexposed the front-lit photos a bit too much on the Gold where the Portra could handle the exposure a bit better. A little lesson was learned there.

Thanks for the comment. In regards to how it was filmed, it was shot on a Red camera by a great videographer. Way better than when Braedon shoots his own videos. Thought we'd pull out the stops for this one. And we thought the model was wonderful as well. Definitely an ok comment!

It's definitely fun to play with different processes of development!

Such a fun film!! Can't wait to get it in.

I believe his meter is broken 😞 hence he meter with the bulb in. ( love his style, unintentionally)

Thanks tons Wesley! Was just about to take a look at your newsletter to see your thoughts on the film. It's nice to get more options for film stocks regardless. Hope you're doing well.

That seems accurate. The Portra should have more latitude - therefore more detail in the shadows while the Gold does have more built in contrast and saturation. Good observations.

I do it all the time with my Mamiya 645 and the 80 f/1.9. The viewfinder just gets VERY dark and hard to use.

That would be a great video topic. I think the most important thing to know with your ND filter is how much each setting on the filter affects your exposure. So you know at this turn of the filter, it is one-stop darker so if you were at 1/1000, now you'd be at 1/500th. Or 2 stops darker at this setting. Then it's just being consistent and using a light meter with those settings in mind. Would be a great video topic though.

Definitely don't disagree with you. I think this will become the non-pro film of choice. It's gorgeous.....200 can be limiting though if you don't always have sunny, bright days.

@@FilmSupplyClub Agree completely on its limitations. It’s also not so great with flash. It does do well as shown in this video as a natural light portrait film.

Why? Portra is already low saturation, low contrast. Why do folks extend those handicaps for general photography by shooting it at half box speed? In most cases, the answer is that they do not know how to use a light meter, properly, so they over expose film to compensate for their personal limitations..

@@randallstewart175 It’s less grainy, and you protect the dark parts of the images. Rating a stock differently is pretty common, and has been pretty common for decades, not only now. When we only had film. And right now it’s even more important, because you don’t have a lightmeter all the time, or only an incident and limited lightmeter. No two DP’s rated Vision 500 at the same speed. Or any other stock for that matter, you use a stock for the way it renders color, and rate it to control the contrast, it’s pretty basic in cinematography, where you would even print a step wedge and chose how you rated the film. And you did that for every batch of film you had, if it wasn’t only one batch. You’re not going to do that with still film, so you can just rated lower because of past experiences or at box speed, depending on what you like. And there’s nothing wrong with that. I learned photography and cinematography using film stocks, I only used positive film so I could learn how to expose and how to light correctly. Now I don’t use it, I use negatives, because I like the look, and always rate them lower than the box speed. And Portra is Neutral, it’s not low saturation. The box speed is just a suggestion, it’s not gospel.

Definitely would have been good to do several more tests and comparisons but we were only given 5 rolls so we were sort of limited with what we could do. But a little note, if we rated Portra 400 at 200, the Portra 400 would be 1 stop overexposed while the Gold would be rated correctly at 200....so the results for that test would be slightly skewed.

@@FilmSupplyClub Thanks for answering. Yeah I know. That’s the point. Many people shoot Portra 400 at 200 or less.

@@randallstewart175 That's a totally unnecessary comment. There are a lot of people learning to shoot film up there so no need to criticize anyone. At least not on this channel.

Totally agree. And if we had this film scanned at 5 different labs, I'm guessing we'd have 5 different results. It's hard to a fair 100% comparison. We did our best by shooting with the same cameras, in the same settings and the same lab but your point defintiely stands. Ektar is one of our favorite films. 100 speed vs 200 speed for the Gold. We're just happy to have more film options that each give a different look. Some choice is better than no choice!

That would be incredible!! Grateful to get the 120 though.

ha! 💪

It's not too hard I shoot with two Pentax 67's or two Pentax 645n at the same time!

Why not both!! So glad to have more choices vs no choices and only one film stock.