What's the Deal with Wolfen NC 400? | Review & Discussion
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 июл 2024
- In this video, I talk about the mysterious new 35mm color filmstock from Orwo: Wolfen NC 400. One of two recently released color films, this limited edition emulsion seems to yield a wide variety of results, making it difficult to pin down what it really looks like. I'll go over the specs of the film, my experience taking photos with it, the experiences of other reviewers and photographers found online, and some speculation and theories about the origins and qualities of this film. Finally, I'll give some insight into the interesting history of this film's manufacturer, its Agfa heritage, and modern-day revival.
Thank you to Freestyle Photo in LA for giving me this roll and making this video possible! I wouldn't have known about this interesting and elusive filmstock otherwise :D
If you are interested in more interesting and unusual filmstock reviews, check out my film photography playlist on this channel! I put out new photography related videos almost every week, so subscribe to stay up to date!
Find me on Instagram and Grainery @Yhanson_Photography
Just processed and scanned my first roll of NC500. Look just as expected. Back in the days, we would also get various results based on the paper used. Kodak negative on Agfa paper in Kodak chemistry, vs Kodak film printed on Fuji paper etc. Then you had various options regarding the use of your filters by enlarging your prints. Same today, different scan processes, different results.
The comparison with other people's results is particularly helpful for managing my expectations with the film, great segment! It's also hard when different labs have wildly varying scanner hardware and software profiles. My hypothesis is that NC400 was a test batch with which they were kind of forced to make a product of, to recoup some early production costs. At least we're getting something non Kodak that's (sometimes) cheap, and non-expired
This is one of the downsides of color negative film. Kodak and Fuji have largely standardized their color negative film so that it essentially has the same color balance and color rendering when digitizing and/printing on RA-4 paper. Newer color stocks like this one (and Lomo Metropolis) don't necessarily conform to that same standard, so unless the lab processing it intervenes during the scanning stage, Kodak's standard color balance settings introduce a color cast. If you got TIFFs back, it's easy enough to fix the white balance after the fact, and if you ever get more rolls of this, you can burn 1 frame to just shoot a white balance card in daylight to make it easier to do that.
I don't know if anyone else does this but the best way I have found to judge the colors of the negative in the truest form is to only white balance on the film border and invert. You want more editing later but just those two steps can give a lot of information of what you have to work with. And you can see any original color casts.
Yep. Balance that to black (white), and what you'll get what the film and its processing is truly showing. So many influences on the colors shown on your screen from what is recorded on the negative.
Excellent video! And yes, I've seen so many different results from NC400 that it makes me want to wait to try it any time soon (also until they fix their supply chain). I also really appreciate the history part of the video (I'm a huge history nerd and a photography nerd). And that German pronunciation was wonderful! Adox (Fotoimpex) manufactures a former ORWO developer Atomal 49, which is excellent! As for ORWO films, I've tried some of the original East German stuff, and it is pretty decent. Also, I love ORWO UN54 and N74 and have several rolls of NP100.
Great review! And a very interesting historic backdrop of the ORWO (short for Original Wolfen I believe). I have not used any of their colour films, but I love the bw ORWO UN54, which is available to consumers rebranded as Lomography Potsdam Kino 100.
This was great and informative. I'm glad I got algorithmed into your channel. Subbed.
Ah! It's really frustrating, honestly. I did a review on this recently and my results are ALSO so different! Great video, per usual!
Thanks for this video. I’ve been using this film a lot lately - it’s generally fun and weird, and sometimes reaaaallly cool!
Great video! I apprecite the deep dive in to granularity comparison. With color negative film its really hard to determine what it's "supposed" to look like without knowing what paper it was intended to be printed on. If it was designed for motion picture use then it was designed with certain lattitude to be color corrected before making a projection print, too. The various looks you see are from all the different possible scanning/scanner options as well as lab correction before the film is handed off to you.
This is a great response! And it does clear a lot of things up! I'm going to keep this in mind for my follow up video! Especially the part about motion film.
I'm 100% here for more videos like this
I feel like lab scanning is probably the reason for everyone getting different results. a lot of a labs use scanners with inbuilt profiles for different films etc but i doubt any of them have a profile for orwo so they might be using a kodak one or ..none at all? theyre probably doing it on a case by case basis so everyones probably getting something a little bit different. I know when im scanning with silverfast i use a ektar 100 profile when scanning kodak gold because it renders the best results, if i scan it with the ektar profile it looks trash.. so the inconsistency probs has a lot to do with the scanning process. either way this film looks a bit crummy haha good video as usual!
Good to know. Also using Silverfast. Got first roll of wolfen color nc400 recently. Want to try it out.
Very good investigation on this film! I just picked up this stock and have not used it yet, I'm glad I watched your video before shooting it for sure. I think this film is a good thing for the community because new and more film is always better, but at the same time I feel like color negative film could be unstable this way for a bit as companies stabilize their process and such to create these emulsions. I'll try out this roll soon especially since I luckily live in Germany so the availability is a bit better than that of when I was in the U.S. so if I screw it up the first time around I can hopefully get more haha.
Thanks for this video. Have two rolls sitting in my fridge. Now I feel the urge to load them up and get out. Curious to see the results I’ll get.
Great video! Have one roll of NC400 in the fridge waiting, so I can't comment on the new films from Wolfen yet ... Really liked the part about the history of the production of film in the town of Wolfen.
In case someone is interested in more details and in the process of making film: There is the "Industrie- und Filmmuseum" in Wolfen, which imho is very much worth a visit. Its located in the first building Agfa built, when they moved over from Berlin in 1909 or 1910 - and its the only building left from the huge complex of the Agfa (and later Orwo-factory). The factory grew over the years to an area of more than 600 acres.
Here, the colour film („Agfa color“) was invented, and they discovered the speed increasing technology using tiny amounts of gold, known as the „Koslowsky-Effekt“.
They have a small camera museum, which is nice. But the highlight is the guided tour, during that they explain nearly every single step in the long and complicated manufacturing-process of film - and show and sometimes demonstrate the equipment needed. And they show how things changed after the second world war, with Wolfen being a part of Eastern Germany.
If you by chance are on a day trip from Berlin to visit the famous Bauhaus in Dessau, or visiting Leipzig, consider a detour to visit this museum, too. Highly recommended! Not sure though, if the do the almost two hour long guided tour in english ...
And forgive me the long praisel of the museum. I had the opportunity for a visit a couple of months ago, and I was deeply impressed.
Thank you for the tests and the info. It’s great to learn something on RUclips from someone who has bothered to do real research and put together so much information. And presented unedited photos as evidence. I guess if they are selling this film as new they must be telling the truth, but the exposure problem might otherwise indicate expired film stock. I expect you thought of that already and dismissed the idea.
I just did a video on this film and wow yeah your results are exactly like the photos I saw online. Luckily my results are a lot more warmed/brown color cast. Very interesting to see this about I made my video. it sounds like i'm one of the rare ones without the green.
Very informative and pleasant to watch. Ive shot a lot of ORWO in the 80's mostly BW film , which was great. I can't say the same for their "Colour" and "Chrome" films. Very interesting to see you being so tolerable with the new film. 😅
There is no "original vs edit" with color negative. The inversion process to get a positive image requires creative choices to be made. Therefore any positive image coming from a color negative film is an edit. Try going down the rabbit hole of manually inverting a negative and you will see what I am talking about. Labs using frontier scanners or whatever are no different. The scanner has certain set of assumptions built into its software, and the person operating it can tweak that. This is why you can send portra 400 off to 2 different labs and get different looks from each even when they use the same scanner.... So I think your "edited" photos compare better to what you see online because most people a publishing a finished image, not the image that a lab tech though was "good enough" or the "neutral inversion" they did at home.
Would be interesting to see half a test roll shot with controlled conditions; if you could get another roll it might be worth bracketing a test chart from 100-800 in daylight and tungsten to see how it performs with a neutral scan.
If I could get hold of any I’d love to plot the density curves and see how they compare but it seems very hard to find.
How are the negatives? Are they thin? Trying to remove scanning from the equation.
ive been watchin your vids about a year and you're underrated asf dude
🙌🙌🙌🙌 thank you for the support and the comment! I appreciate it in a big way!
@@YvonneHansonPhotography np man
Interesting. In 1983 and once again in 1985 I used Orwo color positive roles and got greenish slides. Pretty much same colors as yours results. It was hardly to impossible correct by making prints or much later when I scanned those slides and tried to correct them digitally.
I bought a grey white and black card set to help with the different colour tones of film. Sampling grey and black helped in post (.dng scan in Photoshop). White point, I control manually.
B & H Photo Video Electronics and Camera store sells this film too online and in person and I think they are in New York. Film is super expensive where I live(in Canada) so I have been ordering film from the states and in my most recent order I was just going to buy some Kodak Ultra Max. But saw this film for about the same price and I realled liked the box so I ordered a few. At the time of writing this comment it hasn't arrived yet but I can't wait to test it out. I am knew to shooting with Film since I'm happy to try all different types until I find what I like, thanks for making this great vid fam. I subbed and left a little Like, chat soon. PS. Have you shot with Aridta EDU 200. It's B/W film from Czech
Ayee a fellow Canadian! I know the pain of Canadian film prices well...it's one of the reasons I have such an affinity for expired film usually....it's cheap! I got to visit the BH store in NYC and it was great buying things without the import taxes! Thank you for subscribing, and good luck with your film journey!
@YvonneHansonPhotography I am a fellow Canadian(Nova Scotia) thanks and I'll catch you in another comment section soon
The Arista films are GREAT for getting your feet wet in b&w film and practicing your shots. Definitely not the greatest film in terms of image quality but for the price it’s perfectly usable
I would for now stick with standard color negative stocks until the Wolfen film has that consistency, although I do agree that we need more options for color film stocks. I think there is light at the end of the tunnel for film altogether since there’s been a resurgence in this medium for the past few years.
Your Orwo wound up like my Orwo. I'm shooting another roll tomorrow, and I'll probably try it at 200 because what I've shot is garbage I think is old Agfa they called "new" film in hopes of people not noticing. I badly want them to be legit and just trying to make film despite how difficult it is, but I can't shake the "this is a lie" vibe right now. I can see *some* similarities between this and Color '92, but I think I see a lot more in common between the Lomo color film and their Metropolis stock. However, I will probably buy more of this because I want Orwo to be real and eventually make it work. I want them, Lomo/Inovis? and Ferrania to all make color film alongside Kodak. We can get our ultra clean stuff from Kodak, and our flavor from the other companies. As far as film for you to try ... I might regret this, but I'd love to see what you do with Ferrania P30. (I hope I haven't forgotten you doing a video about this. ha ha). It's so freaking contrasty, but when you figure out what works on it, it's just stunning. I think you would do some really neat editorial work with it.
Thank you! I really like your youtube style.
Today, I learned that ORWO has a 40% discount right now. ORWOPHOTO ... at least here in Germany. Maybe it works also in CA and US.
Is there a video where you tell your personal preference which film you use for what purpose, project... like people, street, landscape, wildlife, b/w, and so on? I know you love Kodak... Maybe you have a comparision Kodak - Fujifilm?
Best wishes, Andreas
Aye thank you for sharing the discount code!! I'll have to try it out on my next order :o also, I'd love to make a video like that, it's a good idea, thank you!
I have just got my scans from the lab (scanned with Noritsu) and my 1st reaction was - meh. It didn't look even close to what Orwo had on the presentation website. I have seen the same love for green and sometimes red. But I am surprised by how well the film behaved on foggy and cloudy days. I did some very basic edits (in Window's default picture viewer) to bring more saturation and play with contrast case by case, and probably will upload my photos on Grainery
I think Lomo's Metropolis is a lot of the experimentation that went into developing this color film. They could refine and release new batches and 'updates' as a 'unique' color film with !QUIRKS! while working towards better color. I don't know if they're there yet. Making color film is a stunningly complicated process. Just watch the 'Smarter Everyday' episodes on his tour through Kodak in Rochester.
There was a lot of red grain in the shadows really annoying to fix it by taking the red channel down.
Considering that this film costs about €16 per roll - and I still remember that I used to get FOUR rolls of Fuji Superia for that price - I think it's unacceptable that it shows all these issues. I just found your channel and I like what I see! I appreciate your analyses and clarity. Keep up the good work! Cheers, //Rick
Came here for the film review...stayed for the spoken German. Show the actual film negs post development so we can see the thickness, color cast and side perf labeling. Thx!
hahaha, I used to speak German....once...long ago. I'll do a follow up video at some point with NC500 and I'll be sure to show the negs too! Thanks for the input!!
@@YvonneHansonPhotography Cool. Thx!
I shot a roll of Ilford Ilfocolor Vintage tone 400 this week, not the one on the disposable camera, but a recent release of a separate film stock, they look weird like this. There's speculation online that it's NC500 but who knows.
Avoiding the risk of lab issues are part of why i like developing my own black and white... If I manage everything myself, there's only one person to blame. Like opening the back yesterday before i was fully rewound.
hahaha I feel so nervous to start self dev! I know its the next step for me...but its so much easier to blame others when things go wrong haha. Its on me this time though, I went to London Drugs instead of the good lab I usually use. Learned my lesson for sure!
@@YvonneHansonPhotography take a few rolls of foma/kentmere (whatever's cheapest locally.) Just do some bracketed brick walls so so you're not wasting anything you want to keep... Try caffenol and rapid fixer as a starting point. In the box with my newest camera there were some old Soviet instructions I want to try next.
@@lukehenderson5097 I do have a few rolls of HP5 in the fridge that have been there for far too long...probably some good candidates for dev practice! The kit has been on my gear list for months- I should finally take the plunge at some point soon. I'm curious about those old soviet instructions! Would be fun to try with some old soviet film- I think Film Washi X sells a revived soviet stock if you're curious.
Nothing prevents you from doing color in your darkroom if you are interested. No lab issues.
I love NC400 but colour balancing it is very tricky. Labs will most likely never get it right due to the green base.
I am fortunate to be able to use my institution's Imacon scanners and when white balanced properly, I am getting the results ORWO shows on their official website. It can be very good.
Have you had a chance to shoot the new Fujifilm 400 yet? The one that has replaced Fuji Xtra Superia 400. It has been released to sale in the last week.
I'd question the shop from what you've said. I often worry about sending non Fujifilm or Kodak films to shops for development and scanning. I've had them do film from Konica Centuria for example and got back completely ruined images, but once I was able to re-scan the negatives myself I found they got the color balances all wrong (the must have used a normal preset). Did you compare the negatives to the images you got back maybe, that might give a deeper insight into if you got a dud roll or not? I got very good results from my first NC400 roll, although I did shoot at 200 ISO and I developed and scanned the film myself its actually a film I've found to be easier to color balance then Kodak and Fujifilm stocks as it doesn't have that orange cast in the negatives that needs to be corrected. I found that after manually setting the white balance against white in the images the colors matched the beautiful high contrast, punchy images I saw online. I'll add that NC500 is a different kettle of fish. You have to edit NC500 to get anything resembling accurate colors from it.
I had some night photos where some parts where underexposed and that murky green did came out. I think its definately not a 400ISO film, I imagine my results would have been much worse if I shot it at 400 😅 I have a second roll of NC400 I got from another supplier I'll be developing soon. It will be interesting to see if it returns the same results or if it matches the results other people have gotten.
I found it super hard to find good info on this too. It's hard to tell why they're flat and greenblue, seems like maybe development issue or maybe that stuck up lab uses a preset for orange film base film for the scans? Sounds like they didn't really care I have 1 more roll to develop, was thinking about using E6 to make slides since its got that color neutral base.
omg one of my 8 reddit interactions ever is in here!
Hahahaha I hope you don't mind me using the Reddit screenshot! I felt like a true investigator combing through every Reddit thread that mentions this film 😂 if you do cross process, I would be really interested to see the results!!
@YvonneHansonPhotography I'm honored it was in there lol I'll send em when I dev/scan em!
Pls tag me when you share your e6 results I'm really curious now
@JoffyCake funny story, I did do a roll in E6 but there was a problem with my chemistry so they ended up a bit funky. I'd be more than happy to share the scans but honestly I'm not sure how on RUclips. If you can find a way to DM me I can send a lightroom album link.
I have new chemicals coming likely this week and a couple more rolls of NC400 so I'll be trying again and if I can be not too lazy I'd like to make a little video on that whole process.
I had to heavily edit my photos because I shot two rolls of this stuff and on one roll I got overwhelming, blue tones and the other one green tones it’s all over the place and for the price I haven’t shot it since.
Its good to know I wasn't the only one who got these weird results. I suspect the lab might have color corrected it...incorrectly. Depending on the lab you used, you might want to get em re-scanned!
It all depends on how you scan. Most different film stocks are cut from the same fabric.
My new fav film stock. It’s perfect for analog to digital workflows. Could InovisCoat break up the market? I think so.
If you scan, there is no such thing as "original" or "unedited" picture. What is possible, is that the settings you are using are not fully compatible with the film stock you are using. Color crossover may of course occur, because this is probably not a real C-41 film with couplers designed for CD-4.
Does this film have the reddish mask in the substrate? I read that Wolfen NC500 does not. That would be a big clue.
My films are greeeeeeeen and 2 stops under expos . I developed the film my self. Silver fast is a little better to scan the film with . But yes my films 3 of them is something bad with I can se it is darker and light on the same roll. Newer buying this Agen 😅
Bad day at the office..
If it is based on ORWO 320, then NC400 would be underexposed if shot at ISO 400 - which will give the murky and grainy colours that you see. And you call that underexposure out already. I just ordered a few rolls as B&H has it for $11.99 as of 8/14/23 (no attachment to B&H). Looks like I'll be shooting it at ISO 200..
Let me know how it goes at 200iso! I think that's a much better idea than box speed
@@YvonneHansonPhotography for sure, there’s an event called Ciclavia this upcoming Sunday in LA’s Koreatown and I’ll shoot a bunch of rolls then.
@@YvonneHansonPhotography It showed up today from B&H
Unlike the product description image, this film is not boxed, just shows up in the plastic tub container. What is more worrisome is it is undated - no expiration date, and the sticker is peeling off so it seems like it has been sitting around for a long time.
It looks like someone home rolled it in their garage, and printed up a bunch of stickers.
Also it is not DX coded, whereas current NC400 is so I have a feeling this is really old, outdated stock. Which may also explain why the results online have been so variable - some images look fine, others look like the film is way expired.
This does not make me feel good about using it, and I am not sure if I should return it instead of blowing cash on developing it to find out that this film too is way expired.
I am actually very disappointed with B&H for not being candid about what they are selling here.
Is it daylight balanced? Because if its tungsten, then you would expect bluer results
It is apparently daylight balanced! But I agree it gives more of a tungsten vibe.
What was the camera you got from Freestyle? It looks itty bitty.
Also, bummer about the bad lab experience. That always sucks given the cost of development.
haha it is itty bitty! Its a foam camera- not functional- but a cute addition to my camera shelf nonetheless :)
Notices a new film stock. OrWO what’s this?
I'd say you can't call your originals originals. It looks like bad scanning and post processing of the originals by the lab. You really should try scanning them yourself and apply appropriate editing during the process. Or ask someone with camera scanning setup to give it a try. It will probably end up way better!
The labs usually use presets for common films that will not fit this particular film.
That's the thing with film, you have to edit them to get a useful result anyway. It's just that when the labs do it it usually doesn't turn out well in my experience.
I agree! I will very likely get these rescanned by my usual lab and hopefully get some better results!
As a lab assistant, I really think the lab didn't treat your film well :/, that is a lot of remjet marks on the scans, problably they didn't cleaned properly
Its validating to hear this from a lab assistant, thank you for weighing in!
Back in the day I've shot Orwo colour films, but in all honesty, I hated the results it gave me. That's in sharp contrast to Orwo B&W films, ISO 100 in particular, which was cheap and amazing, on pair to Ilford's FP4...
I wouldn't trust orwo considering the disaster of their previous film release 😬
I don't know much about them! What was the disaster?
@YvonneHansonPhotography I can't remember the exact film but orwo released a new colour film stock earlier this year and there was large demand for it. They basically sold an amount of film that they could never possibly produce because of their small size, despite making it seem like there would be film for everyone. People spent hundreds of dollars on film orders that just never showed up, even after months. Even worse than that was when people tried to contact orwo for info/refund they would simply be ignored, their comments on Instagram are still turned off as a result of people complaining there.
@YvonneHansonPhotography i learnt about the whole thing watching Lucy lumens recent analog hour stream.
@@leonsefton4509 Omg- I heard a few references to that in the research for this video but I had no idea it was that bad. I know there was a bit of a scandal around this film because ORWO was selling the film at photo fairs but not delivering on pre-orders. Seems like its all solved now, but that does sound like quite a mess...
Why would you buy crap film for the singular sake of supporting a company? I think that is sending exactly the wrong message, don't you?
If we always only buy from the bigger company, there's no room for smaller companies to grow and improve. If we want to have more than one color film manufacturer in the world, we have to support more than one color film manufacturer. No one is going to come out of the gate with a stock to rival portra, and we can't really expect them to. But by supporting smaller projects and manufacturers, we are creating room for those manufacturers to grow and develop.
@@YvonneHansonPhotography No, you don't have to support them if they put out a crap product. Let them earn their stripes through research and development not on the customer's dime. I completely understand the need for a diversity of color film stocks, but pushing rolls on the public at such price is not commendable, nor a good practice to support, no matter how lofty the end goal. Thankfully we have youtubers to do it.
It’s awful. Thanks for the warning.