[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
RE: [APML] RG200 Alert
I just shot 4 rolls of RG-200 at OSP. Two "old" and
two "new". They were hypered together @50°C for 2
hours after 2 hours of desication at -27psi @ 50°C.
The new was in new pakaging without the SELECT on the
box or on the container cap. Expiration dates were
2003 for the new and 2004 for the old. But, they both
were marked 200-2 RB on the negs. and the scans
appeared to have the same sensitivity and density.
Shots of M31 @ 60 minutes on both seem very similar.
I'm gonna start looking for old supplies at camera
shops. The earliest 2004 stuff may still be the same
-2
emulsion.
Jeff Allen
--- Patrick Freeman <pfreeman@woh.rr.com> wrote:
> I have a theory that I’m pursuing on how to tell the
> difference between
> the old and new RG. Went to the local discounter
> tonight and found
> clear differences in packaging of two rolls of
> RG400. Interestingly,
> they both had 2004 expirations. One, though, had a
> 2002 copyright on
> it, while the other had 2000 on it. The other thing
> I noticed is that
> the older roll clearly stated, as Howard noticed
> below, “Kodak Select
> Series” on it (and on the film canister) while the
> newer one did not.
> Finally, the hang-card part of the package was also
> different. The
> newer one had a gold starburst in the upper right
> corner while the older
> package had a blue corner stating “New!” among other
> words (even though
> that one was definitely older). The RG200 was
> labeled similarly to the
> RG400.
>
>
>
> Now, I can’t prove it yet, but I suspect the package
> with “2002” on it
> is the new stuff and the one with “2000” on it is
> the old stuff. All I
> need is a couple of clear hours sometime soon to
> shoot a few exposures
> side-by-side and I can prove/disprove my theory.
> Stay tuned…
>
>
>
> -- Pat Freeman
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-astro-photo@seds.org
> [mailto:owner-astro-photo@seds.org] On
> Behalf Of Howard Edin
> Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 20:43 PM
> To: astro-photo@seds.org
> Subject: RE: [APML] RG200 Alert
>
>
>
> I'm wondering if I have gotten confused (likely 8-)
>
> I just found some Royal Gold Select 200 stashed in
> the back of the
> fridge. The couple of boxes I have recently
> purchased was Royal Gold
> 200, does not say 'Select'.
>
>
>
> Are these two different films and I never noticed?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-astro-photo@seds.org
> [mailto:owner-astro-photo@seds.org]On
> Behalf Of westergren
> Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 7:20 PM
> To: astro-photo@seds.org
> Subject: Re: [APML] RG200 Alert
>
> Howard,
>
> Very interesting that your film is marked with a -3
> instead of the old
> -2. Maybe Kodak changed the film markings later
> than they changed the
> actual film. The new stuff I had was probably an
> early batch, but it
> definitely was marked -2.
>
>
>
> Try hypering it about 4 times as long (or longer).
> the old RG 200 from
> my tests and as reported by Tony Hallas really needs
> to be fully hypered
> to perform well. My limited tests with the new RG
> 200 say the same
> thing.
>
>
>
> If your film shows the expiration date on the box, I
> think the old film
> expired through the end of 2003. The early new
> stuff had dates of
> expiration of Jan and Feb in 2004. Maybe that will
> help tell which is
> which.
>
> Don
>
> From: Howard Edin <mailto:hedin@grapevine.net>
>
>
>
> Don, you are absolutely correct: it has changed.
>
>
>
> Just got back a roll of RG200 and it certainly is a
> new formulation. The
> negative strip says RB 200-3 where as the older
> stuff says 200-2 RB.
> Hypered 3 hrs @ 50c did nothing for the film. The
> exposure of 45 minutes
> was virtually absent of any red, very poor overall
> sensitivity.
>
>
>
> Now I have to figure out which unused rolls I have
> that are the -2 and
> which are -3 . Any one have any ideas besides
> developing a test strip ?
>
>
>
> /howard
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-astro-photo@seds.org
> [mailto:owner-astro-photo@seds.org]On
> Behalf Of westergren
> Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2002 1:39 AM
> To: astro-photo@seds.org
> Subject: [APML] RG200 Alert
>
> I believe another great color negative film has been
> changed by the
> manufacturer - Kodak Royal Gold 200. Film I bought
> in April for a test
> series hypered completely at 30°C in 36 hours with a
> characteristic
> rebate change. That film is the best I've found to
> date. I bought
> additional rolls in late June (marked expire 2/2004)
> and that film
> doesn't hyper in 36 hours, it now takes 96 hours to
> get the same rebate
> change. This new version has no change in the film
> markings, and has
> slightly less light sensitivity than the "older"
> film. The new stuff
> hypered for me in 12 hours at 50°C, with light
> sensitivity better than
> the new 30° hyper, but less than the old 30° hyper.
>
>
>
> It's still a great film, but I hate to loose
> anything in film
> capability. From my tests, RG200 hypers best at
> 50°C.
>
>
>
> Has anyone else observed or sensed a change in
> RG200?
>
>
>
> Don
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
http://www.hotjobs.com
-- APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/> ---
Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>