Kodak Color Plus 200 - it seems pretty unanimous this is a terrible film, and to be avoided at all costs! I had bought a 3-pack of it a few months ago, and have just finished the last roll. I bought it because it was only around $3.50 per roll instead of the usual $5 to $6.00. I already stated it's nostalgia value, as when I want to "emulate" a colour film from the 1930's era, this would be perfect, and it does it in a way that no film emulation or Instagram ever could!
Actually, as far as film goes, I've never seen one so bad - the colours especially are way off. The actual true colours of this beautiful 1951 VW Combi are exactly as shown in the above digital picture. Not only that, even with a heavy dose of sharpening, I couldn't get any sharpness out of it - just blotchiness, and a super abundance of grain. Here are a couple of further examples:
Again, the true colour of this nice P1800 Estate is shown in the Digital picture.
But doesn't it kind of grow on you like an ugly pet? I mean, we all know that digital photography is guaranteed to be super accurate, but don't the digital pics above look a little thin? I used the Rexagon Manual (M42 Thread Mount) lens just to get a different look than the usual Canon DSLR-look that the whole world is now used to. But, even though the Kodak Color Plus film can barely tell orange from red (look at the tail lights of the Volvo!), there's still something endearing in the pictures that it makes. The colours of this film are just as "fat" as digital is "thin"! Super accuracy shouldn't always be the goal of photography, should it? I've found a film here that tugs at my heart strings, and event hough it's so bad, I think I'll keep one of my cameras loaded with it, just in case I come across a scene that really begs the 1930's look.
Don't forget to look at my Print Catalogue. You can reach me by email at firstname.lastname@example.org