Probably another rebrand, wait and see.

>>4471912

It's not a rebrand, this is made in Rochester.

>>4471909
Celebration-worthy news, fuck the Alaris kikes

>>4471909

Rebranded colorplus200 and pro image100 zzzz

>>4471969
people on r*ddit say that its more likely the stock that kodak sells to lomo for lomo 100, since proimage specifies room temp storage and this film specifies refrigerated. it probably won't be as good as PI either

>>4471969
people on r*ddit say that its more likely the stock that kodak sells to lomo for lomo 100, since proimage specifies room temp storage and this film specifies refrigerated. it probably won't be as good as PI either

>>4471969
you are not seeing the large picture nigga, now they might be ballsy enough to also their new vision3, without the remjet its perfectly safe for retards

>>4471973

If you believe the homo100 theory that still doesn’t explain the 200 film.

>>4471974
It also renders punchier blues which is nice.

File: Image_7-1019x1536.jpg (214 KB, 1019x1536)

214 KB JPG

f-fuji greens?...

They probably shat themselves when they discovered how well the new chinese stock was selling kek.

Fucking bad news
I want film to die

When we're at it what the qrd on the drama?

If it’s not cheaper than currently available film, then what’s the big deal? It makes zero difference then. The schizo bloviating about differences between colour films is stat chasing pixel peeing nerd nonsense. Tell me which is the cheapest, they’re all 95% close enough.

>>4471943
It's literally a rebrand, they said so in the announcement. Difference is it's (real) Kodak themselves rebranding their own film rather than hipster faggots upcharging for ultramax with light leaks.
No shit it's made in Rochester that's where Kodak is.
They must've found some loophole that lets them cut out Alaris.

>>4472347
agreed. vision 3 repacks like cyberpunk are as cheap as it gets and much sharper than dog shit like ultramax and pro films cost double or triple.

>>4472437
>vision 3 repacks like cyberpunk are as cheap as it gets
where? They're usually like $12 which is more than lots of "real" films.
>dog shit like ultramax
oh fuck off ultramax is plenty sharp and has more accurate colors than vision3 in c41
>>4472347
This fellow is actually right on, if it's not cheaper than gold why bother? But it might actually be cheaper than gold. If they truly are "cutting out the middle man" (alaris) it might be cheaper once we get past the new film premium.

>>4472228
>Fucking bad news
>I want film to die

And I want my Kodachrome back!

>>4472542
It gonna suck dick and you'll discover that dead things are only good in fantasy and there is no "kodachrome look"

>>4472556
>there is no "kodachrome look

I shot Kodachrome since 1975 kid, so I will know it when I see it.

>>4472576
damn, imagine being 60+

don't care just bought 10 rolls of pro image 100