Sorry to be so offtopic but does anyone know of a trick to log back into an Instagram account?? I somehow lost the account password. I would love any assistance you can give me.
@Miles Khalid Thanks so much for your reply. I got to the site thru google and Im in the hacking process now. I see it takes quite some time so I will get back to you later when my account password hopefully is recovered.
I was, quite honestly, surprised by how well I liked the Kodak film! I usually shoot Fuji for color, but this has me rethinking that. Fifty years ago, I shot a lot of Kodachrome and Ektachrome, but I was always a bit annoyed by the artificial color profiles. This doesn’t look at all bad, though...
What can I say? Some shots I preferred the Fuji, some the Kodak. A couple of shots seemed almost indistinguishable. Either film would seem to be a great choice. However, I've never shot Ultramax, so I'm going to give that one a try soon. Nice comparison! 👍
I use the Superia 400 a lot where I live, as the colours that is produces lend themselves better to the rain forest tones we have up here in the Pacific Northwest.
I use both films all the time, and this comparison shows off their strengths and weaknesses. UltraMax is great for when I want a warmer overall look with deep blue shadows, especially in the middle of summer, thought it's not always the best for skin tones. Fujifilm is cooler with a red tint which, for me, feels a bit more balanced and versatile, and it's fantastic in the winter, though it can leave foliage looking a bit dull.
I shot superia at first, then tried out the ultramax and absolutely fell in love with it. I much prefer skin tones in kodak, it tones down any blemishes, veins and impurities in the faces, while in superia any small red spot on the face turns all magenta and is enhanced (at least that's how i feel about them). For landscapes kodak givest nicer greens imo. Ultramax is also cheaper and more accesible where I live, so its a winner in all categories for me.
Def prefer ultramax. Been using it for years as one of my main films, it has better dynamic range, the shadows don’t get that washed out brown muddy look of Fuji. The colors are warmer as well.
As much as I love the fuji, I've been a fan for so long, somehow I still prefer the accurate color reproduction of Kodak films in general. Fuji's tend to have these weird green tints in shadows and situations of high contrasts, especially noticable in shooting buildings and city scapes, where the greens aren't favorable compared to nature shots, makes them look crap at times tbh. But hey, if that's your look, that's your look! Shoot with what you love!
I don't know why but I love Fuji's colours for that reason, a lot of Kodak's stocks feel too clinical too me. After all, there must be a reason for shooting film, to avoid the clinical look of digital in my case.
I prefer the Kodak. The colors were generally warmer, and shifted towards the green side. I noticed that the Fuji seemed to be more shifted purple and cooler. When I think of film photography, the look given by the Kodak is what I picture.
Superia 400 has a magenta cast that doesn’t always look pleasing, but it shines during golden hour, and skin tones also improve at golden hour. That said, I’ve found that if you pulled Superia 400 just one stop in development, you’ll get the best colors out if it, and you’ll also get rid of the mushy shadows, because even metering for the shadows, it can end up underexposed. Maybe it’s not really a 400 ISO, but who knows...
Wow it's crazy seeing the 2 films compared side-by-side. I always had personally felt superia 400 was colorful but compared with the Kodak it's actually more muted
Great video comparing the two films. The Kodak does have a warm tone than Fuji on the wider shots, but I like the look of Fuji for the closet headshots.
Yessss I’ve been hoping to find a comparison vid of these two films!!! 🤩🤩 I always love Fuji, but the Kodak ultramax has very nice colours, I like shooting it at 200iso - but I prefer the tones of Fuji as well, the superia is very nice, I recently bought some and started shooting it at 200iso as well, so I hope it turns out ok. What iso were you both shooting on? Box speed? 🙂
The results look like they were shot at box speed. Shooting it at 200 will not change the look unless you pull your film in development. I find that Superia 400 shot at 200, then pulled -1 yields the best posible results.
I was always a huge fan of Kodak. They're actually pretty good - my takeaway from this is that Fuji is more stylized whereas Kodak just presents you with great colours. Thanks for the video!
kodak color recreation is perfect.Fujifilm has fallacious color.In gray objects,fuji lacks of red color but in some other conditions,fuji looks overwhelming red compare to ease and sophisticate color science of kodak.
I own a fuji xtrans camera and I love the classic negative film simulation and the superia xtra 400 seems similar, so I'll try this film soon! I've used ultramax during autumn in the foliage season and the colours of the leaves look fantastic with its warm tones. In the winter season probably superia or portra 400 could be a better choice than ultramax
Was surprised that I liked the greens so much on the kodak. Also preferred skin tones with the ultramax. The water and sky were great with the Superia. Both films did a good job.
I have been binge-watching your videos. I finally stumbled on a fellow Bay Area film photographer! 🙌 (And also Filipino??) Thank you for all of your helpful videos. I recently just got into film photography. It’s super fun to see you go shoot in my neck of the woods.
honestly, don’t shy away from superia… i’ve never got any sort of green cast with home developing & honestly made some of the most portra looking photos using superia. my fav stock by far!
I prefer the warmer, more saturated colors of the Ultramax for everything which isn't people, but the Superia does look great for that. I think it'd be interesting to see the same films also compared, say, walking around the city rather than the park. I feel like the Kodak has a big advantage if there's lots of grass around (so it'd be my personal choice for where I'd shoot), but Fuji might have other strengths for the street. Or maybe darker shadows would have that color cast and it'd be frustrating.
Love what you guys did. It's hard to choose which is better, both look great and have their own likeable qualities. I have the Elan 7 IIe and use both film stocks. Thanks again for reminding us of these two. Quick question for KingJvpes, what or which area in the bay area is good for thrifting? I'm looking to get an older model 35mm. Thanks
Thank you for a very useful comparison. I found that the skies in the Kodak images were too cyan for my taste. They reminded me of the old Agfa CT 18 reversal film of the 1960s.
I haven't shot either, only gold and portra, but I think i'll def pick up superia as my next purchase. I like the slight greenish cast in shadows and the more muted colours.
Great comparison.. I think I like the Kodak better, but I've shot Kodak all my life, so...I did a lot of landscapes back in the day & that is the only time I shot Fuji, it was the Reala. I really miss that film............
Very useful comparison- thank you. Maybe I missed it, but were these shot at box speed? I think a widely held view with Pro400H was that it benefited from 1stop overexposure; I was wondering what the experience in this regard with these two film stocks were? Thanks again 🙏
I've always preferred Kodak Ultramaxx and Ektar color films, a lot of my subjects have darker skin with golden undertones, it makes a huge difference... especially if you compare to Portra or the discontinued Fuji 400H
Starting out with film (all I had) in the early 90s I favored Kodak. When Walmart became a big item Fuji pushed Kodak out for availability for me. I wasn't happy with switching up my film but I did it anyway. Any chance I had at Kodak I would get it. I didn't notice the color saturation back then but I have noticed when I edit my digital photos I tend to make them slightly warmer. It feels a little more calming for me to look at them. Now, in perspective to what I saw here between the two. The color with the Kodak to me looked richer to the Fuji. Between these two I would take the Kodak but if Fuji was all I had, I would use it with no issues.
If I have to shoot at box speed, then I would go with Ultramax, but If I have enough light to overexpose 1 or 2 stops, then with Superia. I do prefer Fuji's grain structure, it is actually surprisingly fine, amount of detail is also satisfying and that red/magenta tint is almost gone. Also alike Fuji C200 when dried superia already has nice flatness which is good for scanning.
You do realize the color balance is mostly defined by the balance set in inverting the negatives. So first get the blues for the sky exactly the same, then compare the other colors in the image. Or both balance them to the same middle grey spot and compare. Just comparing the same shots while someone else inverts your images just means you are comparing the presets the scanner/inverter used :).
interesting teal leaning on blues with UM. I suspect this tint is the softer contrast (maybe?) as compared to XT. Id give it to XT on this one for color and tone like you said, but Ive been burned by Fuji before. Thats why I appreciate these comparisons. Thanks!
Love this comparison. I've got a suggest and a question. 1. What do you mean by "exposing correctly for the shadows"? Do you mean that you should expose for the shadows of do you have a different way to achieve photos without the green cast of Superia? 2. I would love to see you and Trev switch up the films. Maybe you can find out other strengths/weaknesses of both films? Especially as you both are so used to both stocks. Thanks for s great episode.
@@segzeeman7356 thanks! Maybe I misused some terms, English is not my native language. I'm after how he achieves getting enough exposure in the shadows? By metering in the shadows or any other technique?
@@Leondrian it depends on the scene. If its a high contrast scene you will meter how you want the final image to look. If the part of the scene or composition is in the shadows and takes up maybe 25-50% area of the scene, and there’s detail in the shadows, then you want to expose or get enough exposure in those shadows. If the details in the shadows are important for the image, you want the properly exposed. Underexposed film negatives are ugly and get an ugly colour cast. You’re better off overexposing your film vs underexposing it. Btw, Im talking about underexposure where you get the colour cast and what’s referred to as muddy shadows. Slight underexposure is okay depending on the scene, but you’re better off overexposing with film. Hope that helps.
@@segzeeman7356I'm getting what your saying. Thanks for telling me your process. I usually overexpose my Superia 1-2 stops anyway. Just so I protect the shadows and avoid those casts. I think it would be a really great video for @KingJvpes to show us how he meters in different situations and with different stocks.
Very nice Video man! I really love the Images with the Fuji Film. Only thing I wanna say is that I found it a bit annoying, that you always switched sides in the comparison shot. Sometimes Fuji was left sometimes it was right. So I always had to check what is written above the image. other than that, I love your editing style. Really enjoyed the video ^^
Both have pluses and minuses and it’s great to have the options. As a long time Kodak shooter I obviously lean towards Kodak. I keep wanting to like Fuji but can’t get past the color cast in certain situations. Thanks for the video.
Imho its not even close,... the kodak film i think just brings out the warmth and colors that we long for in film in the day of digital. The fuji is fine and everything, but the kodak is the one that just brings that smile to your face.
I shot ultramax only once a while ago, it really produces saturated images (i slightly underexpose) But i prefer Superia cause of the shadow tint. Althought Ultramax looks more natural and warm And If you ever come across Superia 800, just dont hesitate, its dope
Ultramax is definitely my daily driver for my film work! I had a bad experience with Superia, the magenta color cast was really strong even during golden hour. I realize now that I probably just underexposed it lol. This makes me want to give it another shot!
In these shots I would pick the Ultramax. I have found that the fuji needs to be overexposed to bring out the best which does detract from it's 400 speed.
Where I live, the Superia X-Tra 400 is THE ONLY affordable color film option by far. It costs 10$ a roll and the next cheapest is about 15$. Sadly it rarely available, and when it is, it gets sold off quickly.
looks like Superia handle the blue more realistic for me, not shifting to cyan and being too warm. But on the other hand it got the green cast so... a trade off i guess
Strange. I just ordered a pack of both Kodak Ultramax and Fuji Superia 400 and this is what my phone recommends me haha Well, I’m glad it did. Great vid, thank you 🙏🏻
Great video, I've been following you for a while! I have that CANON ELAN 7E, but every now and then I get FILM SCRATCHES, and I think is due to some sort of metallic piece that holds the film inside. Have you or your friend got any issues like me? Cheers, Keep it up and congrats for the 100K.
i prefer the fuji because i usually find kodak ultramax for the same price but in 3 packs of 24 exposure rolls compared to fuji superia's 36 exposure rolls. i guess you can find ultramax in 36 exposure rolls but ive always seen them in 24.
Some shots looked better to my eye shot with the Fuji film, some with the Kodak film. I generally preferred the warmer tones of the Kodak film but thought the Fuji film handled skintones better. So, unless I was going to be shooting people, I'd choose the Kodak. If I was shooting people, the Fuji.
I always have the tendency towards warmer color, and less greenish overpower, so i have always been on the opposite side of fuji most of the time, due to its way renders green... anyhow, from where I’m from, easier and cheaper to get kodak ultramax so it helps to make the decision too
Love this comparison. Im a beginner in film photography and I learn A LOT from your channel. Thank you so much 💖 much love from PH 🇵🇭
Sorry to be so offtopic but does anyone know of a trick to log back into an Instagram account??
I somehow lost the account password. I would love any assistance you can give me.
@Ronnie Castiel instablaster =)
@Miles Khalid Thanks so much for your reply. I got to the site thru google and Im in the hacking process now.
I see it takes quite some time so I will get back to you later when my account password hopefully is recovered.
@Miles Khalid it worked and I finally got access to my account again. I am so happy:D
Thanks so much, you saved my account :D
@Ronnie Castiel No problem :)
I was, quite honestly, surprised by how well I liked the Kodak film! I usually shoot Fuji for color, but this has me rethinking that. Fifty years ago, I shot a lot of Kodachrome and Ektachrome, but I was always a bit annoyed by the artificial color profiles. This doesn’t look at all bad, though...
I like the Kodak ones more for portrait and the Fuji for inanimate objects and scenery. It pops differently for me
Yeahh I agree!
Exactly what I was thinking. The Kodak has great skin tones but the colors on the Fuji make the scenery look more interesting
What can I say? Some shots I preferred the Fuji, some the Kodak. A couple of shots seemed almost indistinguishable. Either film would seem to be a great choice. However, I've never shot Ultramax, so I'm going to give that one a try soon. Nice comparison! 👍
Shot it once, never did it again myself /:
I usually am a Fuji man, UltraMax is loaded in my Canon L1 RF, 24 ready!! Wheelies to the sights!!!
@@KentTeffetellerplease let me know your feeling. 😊
I use the Superia 400 a lot where I live, as the colours that is produces lend themselves better to the rain forest tones we have up here in the Pacific Northwest.
I use both films all the time, and this comparison shows off their strengths and weaknesses. UltraMax is great for when I want a warmer overall look with deep blue shadows, especially in the middle of summer, thought it's not always the best for skin tones. Fujifilm is cooler with a red tint which, for me, feels a bit more balanced and versatile, and it's fantastic in the winter, though it can leave foliage looking a bit dull.
I shot superia at first, then tried out the ultramax and absolutely fell in love with it. I much prefer skin tones in kodak, it tones down any blemishes, veins and impurities in the faces, while in superia any small red spot on the face turns all magenta and is enhanced (at least that's how i feel about them). For landscapes kodak givest nicer greens imo. Ultramax is also cheaper and more accesible where I live, so its a winner in all categories for me.
Def prefer ultramax. Been using it for years as one of my main films, it has better dynamic range, the shadows don’t get that washed out brown muddy look of Fuji. The colors are warmer as well.
good video! that recap at the end was great. I wish other film photography channels did that
As much as I love the fuji, I've been a fan for so long, somehow I still prefer the accurate color reproduction of Kodak films in general. Fuji's tend to have these weird green tints in shadows and situations of high contrasts, especially noticable in shooting buildings and city scapes, where the greens aren't favorable compared to nature shots, makes them look crap at times tbh.
But hey, if that's your look, that's your look! Shoot with what you love!
I don't know why but I love Fuji's colours for that reason, a lot of Kodak's stocks feel too clinical too me. After all, there must be a reason for shooting film, to avoid the clinical look of digital in my case.
Love watching film stock comparisons. Love both film stocks but, always good to see others perspectives. Thank you for that!
Just starting with film photography and your work as been helping a lot man! Thank you
Good to see your new uploads.. you have inspired me since last start of lockdown to push with film photography..
Your videos always bring such joy and inspiration. Keep up the amazing work!!
loving these film comparison videos !! hope you’ll do more of such !!! ❤️
I always hear about Fuji having great greens, but in this comparison Kodak really made the grass and bridge beautiful. I need to try that UltraMax.
I prefer the Kodak. The colors were generally warmer, and shifted towards the green side. I noticed that the Fuji seemed to be more shifted purple and cooler. When I think of film photography, the look given by the Kodak is what I picture.
I think I like the color of the Kodak a little more. That being said I do think that for the price it is hard to beat either of them!!
I've always preferred Fuji over Ultramax. This just kinda cemented it for me.
Great video as always! I love Ultramax 400 but your Fuji images looked awesome in this one! I feel like the highlights look better with fuji
Ultramax for me. Just recently shot my first 3 rolls of it and loved it.
Sorry if I missed it in the video, but did you shoot at box speed? What metering mode did you use? I have an Elan 7N, so I'm curious.
Love these film comparisons. Cheers man!
Just got my first film camera today and your videos are really helpful 😁
Superia 400 has a magenta cast that doesn’t always look pleasing, but it shines during golden hour, and skin tones also improve at golden hour.
That said, I’ve found that if you pulled Superia 400 just one stop in development, you’ll get the best colors out if it, and you’ll also get rid of the mushy shadows, because even metering for the shadows, it can end up underexposed. Maybe it’s not really a 400 ISO, but who knows...
Wow it's crazy seeing the 2 films compared side-by-side. I always had personally felt superia 400 was colorful but compared with the Kodak it's actually more muted
Great video comparing the two films. The Kodak does have a warm tone than Fuji on the wider shots, but I like the look of Fuji for the closet headshots.
Yessss I’ve been hoping to find a comparison vid of these two films!!! 🤩🤩 I always love Fuji, but the Kodak ultramax has very nice colours, I like shooting it at 200iso - but I prefer the tones of Fuji as well, the superia is very nice, I recently bought some and started shooting it at 200iso as well, so I hope it turns out ok. What iso were you both shooting on? Box speed? 🙂
The results look like they were shot at box speed. Shooting it at 200 will not change the look unless you pull your film in development. I find that Superia 400 shot at 200, then pulled -1 yields the best posible results.
@@AbdonPhirathon oh thanks for that I’ll keep that in mind for superia 😍
It’s the Kodak for me .... warm and true to life is all that matters as I use film for documentaries purposes. 🙌🙌Kodak!
I was always a huge fan of Kodak. They're actually pretty good - my takeaway from this is that Fuji is more stylized whereas Kodak just presents you with great colours. Thanks for the video!
kodak color recreation is perfect.Fujifilm has fallacious color.In gray objects,fuji lacks of red color but in some other conditions,fuji looks overwhelming red compare to ease and sophisticate color science of kodak.
i shot kodak alot,i knew that the thumbnail is tricky hahaha.I always know how good kodak can capture the sky color/contrast and water reflection.
Funny how people have been saying Fuji is the cooler toned stock, while Kodak looks less warm in these examples
I own a fuji xtrans camera and I love the classic negative film simulation and the superia xtra 400 seems similar, so I'll try this film soon! I've used ultramax during autumn in the foliage season and the colours of the leaves look fantastic with its warm tones. In the winter season probably superia or portra 400 could be a better choice than ultramax
Yep! I’d say classic chrome is more like Kodak and classic neg is more like Fuji.
Was surprised that I liked the greens so much on the kodak. Also preferred skin tones with the ultramax. The water and sky were great with the Superia. Both films did a good job.
I have been binge-watching your videos. I finally stumbled on a fellow Bay Area film photographer! 🙌 (And also Filipino??) Thank you for all of your helpful videos. I recently just got into film photography. It’s super fun to see you go shoot in my neck of the woods.
Yep, Jonathan is Filipino.
I recently bought a roll of Ultramax 400 but that Xtra 400 is really nice too! Going to try that one out too.
I truly enjoyed this video!
honestly, don’t shy away from superia… i’ve never got any sort of green cast with home developing & honestly made some of the most portra looking photos using superia. my fav stock by far!
great video! Love to see Sactown in the mix!
I prefer the warmer, more saturated colors of the Ultramax for everything which isn't people, but the Superia does look great for that. I think it'd be interesting to see the same films also compared, say, walking around the city rather than the park. I feel like the Kodak has a big advantage if there's lots of grass around (so it'd be my personal choice for where I'd shoot), but Fuji might have other strengths for the street. Or maybe darker shadows would have that color cast and it'd be frustrating.
Love what you guys did. It's hard to choose which is better, both look great and have their own likeable qualities. I have the Elan 7 IIe and use both film stocks. Thanks again for reminding us of these two. Quick question for KingJvpes, what or which area in the bay area is good for thrifting? I'm looking to get an older model 35mm. Thanks
Thank you for a very useful comparison. I found that the skies in the Kodak images were too cyan for my taste. They reminded me of the old Agfa CT 18 reversal film of the 1960s.
I used to hate on Kodak ultra max but after seeing more comparisons and examples I’m starting to like it a lot I also love Fuji superia 400.
I haven't shot either, only gold and portra, but I think i'll def pick up superia as my next purchase. I like the slight greenish cast in shadows and the more muted colours.
Great comparison.. I think I like the Kodak better, but I've shot Kodak all my life, so...I did a lot of landscapes back in the day & that is the only time I shot Fuji, it was the Reala. I really miss that film............
This helped me choose Fuji, I just personally prefer the way the colors turned out on it but I definitely might shoot the Kodak for certain situations
Kodak took the cake nearly every time. Cool comparison.
LMAO these are literally the two films I have in my house right now and I was watching this video to see which one I should try out first.
Very useful comparison- thank you. Maybe I missed it, but were these shot at box speed? I think a widely held view with Pro400H was that it benefited from 1stop overexposure; I was wondering what the experience in this regard with these two film stocks were? Thanks again 🙏
I've always preferred Kodak Ultramaxx and Ektar color films, a lot of my subjects have darker skin with golden undertones, it makes a huge difference... especially if you compare to Portra or the discontinued Fuji 400H
did i catch some camera bars in the song at 4:13 lol?? What song is that?
Starting out with film (all I had) in the early 90s I favored Kodak. When Walmart became a big item Fuji pushed Kodak out for availability for me. I wasn't happy with switching up my film but I did it anyway. Any chance I had at Kodak I would get it. I didn't notice the color saturation back then but I have noticed when I edit my digital photos I tend to make them slightly warmer. It feels a little more calming for me to look at them. Now, in perspective to what I saw here between the two. The color with the Kodak to me looked richer to the Fuji. Between these two I would take the Kodak but if Fuji was all I had, I would use it with no issues.
Kodak all the way. COLOR primarily. There were a few shots where the Fuji looked a bit better. Well done.
Can you try Kodak Proimage 100? It's one of my favorite films to shoot.
If I have to shoot at box speed, then I would go with Ultramax, but If I have enough light to overexpose 1 or 2 stops, then with Superia. I do prefer Fuji's grain structure, it is actually surprisingly fine, amount of detail is also satisfying and that red/magenta tint is almost gone. Also alike Fuji C200 when dried superia already has nice flatness which is good for scanning.
You do realize the color balance is mostly defined by the balance set in inverting the negatives.
So first get the blues for the sky exactly the same, then compare the other colors in the image. Or both balance them to the same middle grey spot and compare.
Just comparing the same shots while someone else inverts your images just means you are comparing the presets the scanner/inverter used :).
I prefer Kodak. Fuji is usually a quick last resort option for me when shooting. I do appreciate the warmer tones produced with Kodak.
interesting teal leaning on blues with UM. I suspect this tint is the softer contrast (maybe?) as compared to XT. Id give it to XT on this one for color and tone like you said, but Ive been burned by Fuji before. Thats why I appreciate these comparisons. Thanks!
Love this comparison. I've got a suggest and a question.
1. What do you mean by "exposing correctly for the shadows"? Do you mean that you should expose for the shadows of do you have a different way to achieve photos without the green cast of Superia?
2. I would love to see you and Trev switch up the films. Maybe you can find out other strengths/weaknesses of both films? Especially as you both are so used to both stocks.
Thanks for s great episode.
He means getting a proper exposure in the shadows. Getting enough exposure in the shadows so they aren’t too dark.
@@segzeeman7356 thanks! Maybe I misused some terms, English is not my native language. I'm after how he achieves getting enough exposure in the shadows? By metering in the shadows or any other technique?
@@Leondrian it depends on the scene. If its a high contrast scene you will meter how you want the final image to look. If the part of the scene or composition is in the shadows and takes up maybe 25-50% area of the scene, and there’s detail in the shadows, then you want to expose or get enough exposure in those shadows. If the details in the shadows are important for the image, you want the properly exposed. Underexposed film negatives are ugly and get an ugly colour cast. You’re better off overexposing your film vs underexposing it. Btw, Im talking about underexposure where you get the colour cast and what’s referred to as muddy shadows. Slight underexposure is okay depending on the scene, but you’re better off overexposing with film. Hope that helps.
@@segzeeman7356I'm getting what your saying. Thanks for telling me your process.
I usually overexpose my Superia 1-2 stops anyway. Just so I protect the shadows and avoid those casts.
I think it would be a really great video for @KingJvpes to show us how he meters in different situations and with different stocks.
I'll shoot Ultramax every now and then but I'm more a fan of Superia. I'll pick Color Plus 200 all day though! That's some good stuff there!
Very nice Video man! I really love the Images with the Fuji Film. Only thing I wanna say is that I found it a bit annoying, that you always switched sides in the comparison shot. Sometimes Fuji was left sometimes it was right. So I always had to check what is written above the image. other than that, I love your editing style. Really enjoyed the video ^^
Both have pluses and minuses and it’s great to have the options. As a long time Kodak shooter I obviously lean towards Kodak. I keep wanting to like Fuji but can’t get past the color cast in certain situations. Thanks for the video.
I say the same about Kodak 😂
@@AbdonPhirathon Just goes to show photography is an art form after all.
Imho its not even close,... the kodak film i think just brings out the warmth and colors that we long for in film in the day of digital. The fuji is fine and everything, but the kodak is the one that just brings that smile to your face.
I shot ultramax only once a while ago, it really produces saturated images (i slightly underexpose)
But i prefer Superia cause of the shadow tint. Althought Ultramax looks more natural and warm
And If you ever come across Superia 800, just dont hesitate, its dope
Ultramax is definitely my daily driver for my film work! I had a bad experience with Superia, the magenta color cast was really strong even during golden hour. I realize now that I probably just underexposed it lol. This makes me want to give it another shot!
yep. try over exposing superia 400 by at least a stop or two. that should lessen the magentas in the shadows.
In these shots I would pick the Ultramax. I have found that the fuji needs to be overexposed to bring out the best which does detract from it's 400 speed.
Where I live, the Superia X-Tra 400 is THE ONLY affordable color film option by far. It costs 10$ a roll and the next cheapest is about 15$. Sadly it rarely available, and when it is, it gets sold off quickly.
My first ever roll of film was Ultramax. Apart from that I also like Kodak Gold 200 a lot
Nice! Kinda prefer UltraMax, but they're both good.
I'm leaning more towards the Kodak overall, but the skies seem more natural on Fuji but it tends to be more red and green biased.
looks like Superia handle the blue more realistic for me, not shifting to cyan and being too warm. But on the other hand it got the green cast so... a trade off i guess
I shot a lot of Superia years ago but never really liked the color. It's definitely a cooler-toned film than Kodak Ultramax.
Ironic how the Ultramax looks cooler in this video
What’s the song at 2:08?! Man, you gotta start leaving links for the music you use! straight 🔥
Kodak ultramax was intended to be my "all days" film before this pandemic, now I think I cannot even afford shooting film. That's sad
You can always get a really cheap dslr to scratch your photography itch if film is the only photography option for you.
Strange. I just ordered a pack of both Kodak Ultramax and Fuji Superia 400 and this is what my phone recommends me haha
Well, I’m glad it did. Great vid, thank you 🙏🏻
I love ultramax always been a favorite of mine
Great video, I've been following you for a while! I have that CANON ELAN 7E, but every now and then I get FILM SCRATCHES, and I think is due to some sort of metallic piece that holds the film inside. Have you or your friend got any issues like me? Cheers, Keep it up and congrats for the 100K.
i prefer the fuji because i usually find kodak ultramax for the same price but in 3 packs of 24 exposure rolls compared to fuji superia's 36 exposure rolls. i guess you can find ultramax in 36 exposure rolls but ive always seen them in 24.
What settings were used for the shots?
Lil bit liking Kodak because colors. Nice comparison brotha. 👌🏼✌🏽
I liked the Kodak Ultramax better due to more color saturation. The Fuji was very nice though.
Some shots looked better to my eye shot with the Fuji film, some with the Kodak film. I generally preferred the warmer tones of the Kodak film but thought the Fuji film handled skintones better. So, unless I was going to be shooting people, I'd choose the Kodak. If I was shooting people, the Fuji.
7:31 the colour difference between the jacket and hoodie is huge on the UltraMax
I always have the tendency towards warmer color, and less greenish overpower, so i have always been on the opposite side of fuji most of the time, due to its way renders green... anyhow, from where I’m from, easier and cheaper to get kodak ultramax so it helps to make the decision too
Both are good. The one is more on the grren side the other on the magenta. I go for.....................blackandwhite
wow i honestly only use these two film stock lol my kind of video
I think I prefer the Ultramax, because I prefer the yellow cast than the magenta one that Fuji has.
I don’t know why but I do prefer Ultramax over Superia but on the other hand C200 over Gold 🤷🏽♂️
My opinion
The greens from the Kodak are awesome
But the underexposed color cast of the Fuji looks fun... lol
Fun in a good way btw
After a few disappointing shoots I can now say with confidence- I won't miss xtra superia 400 when Fujifilm will eventually discontinue it.
What is the name of the first track?!
*Ultramax wins every time* 🔥🔥
I prefer the Superia for the most part
Where’s this at?
Superia looks so much better imo. Better skin tones, pastel colours. I find the ultramax to appear a little muddy in the shadows
That was the Kodak that you’re describing lol
I shoo with both because sometime fuji be sold out and i have to get kodak so i like both
ULTRAMAX!
Fuji all the way....
It looks bit old school & have kind of dreamy look (thats the main reason im considering film photography)
where is it?
I feel like Kodak had better color for landscape and Fuji better for portraits!
I do prefer the Ultramax for the colors. That and I can't find Superia locally to me. ;)