Kodak Gold vs. ColorPlus

In this article: Unconvincing comparisons and Kodak’s cryptic response. My first attempt at comparing Kodak Gold vs. ColorPlus. Refining test equipment and methods. Kodak Gold vs. ColorPlus: grain. Kodak Gold vs. ColorPlus: colours. Kodak Gold vs. ColorPlus: dynamic range and reciprocity failure. Kodak Gold vs. ColorPlus: differences between the physical negatives. Which film is better, Kodak Gold or ColorPlus? Support this blog & get premium features with GOLD memberships!

Kodak Gold and Kodak ColorPlus differ in pricing, availability, and box design. But given that they are both “budget” ISO 200 emulsions in Kodak’s line-up of films, I struggled to understand what the differences are when it comes to the results.

To figure this out once and for all, I teamed up with Daren from LearnFilm.Photography. We performed a series of real-world tests in his Hasselblad 500CM to control for lens, perspective, and exposure inconsistencies seen in others’ comparisons.

Turns out, Gold and ColorPlus’ grain looks identical at 10K DPI, and so do many other properties. There are slight changes in how those films render colours — though they aren’t nearly as clear as the Kodak marketing or the internet lore would suggest.

Below, I break down the results of our experiments and share some practical advice for those stuck deciding between the two films — or any two films.

✪ Watch Daren’s YouTube video comparing those films here or below.

Unconvincing comparisons and Kodak’s cryptic response.

I’ve shot and reviewed both films on this blog (see Kodak Gold review and Kodak ColorPlus review) and studied multiple sources online comparing those films. I’ve even contacted Kodak about this, yet I received no satisfactory answer. Their widely-quoted explanation of the difference between the films in the EMULSIVE interview provides no clarity either.

The online comparisons I reviewed had unconvincing side-by-side images shot at different times, probably different cameras, and unknown scanning methods. They all suggested ColorPlus to be an older, grainer emulsion technology but failed to provide sources or visual proof.

Wikipedia lists ColorPlus and Kodacolor 200 brands as the same film, whereas Kodakcolor is described on its dedicated Wiki as an old trademark for the modern Kodak Gold 200 emulsion.

I asked Kodak on Twitter back in June 2023 if they could name the differences, and they said: “ColorPlus 200 was introduced years ago as a lower cost offering intended for price-sensitive markets. Customers tell us it has a more vintage feel.”

I was happy to hear back, but I didn’t find Kodak’s response satisfactory.

My first attempt at comparing Kodak Gold vs. ColorPlus.

I had my first opportunity to compare the films when I wrote the ColorPlus review. What I found surprised me a great deal: I could barely see any difference between them.

This felt contrary to everything I’ve read and seen online. Could the scanning software have something to do with the difference in the looks? Could the opinions of the people describing the differences between those films have been swayed by marketing or just unproven internet film lore?

Both of the samples in my first comparison attempt were scanned at home on PrimeFilm XAs with neutral settings into digital negatives and then inverted by hand; I was pretty confident that the scanning software had no relative effect on the final result.

Yet I could not reliably attribute the difference in colours I saw in the images to the emulsion: my samples were not perfectly matched. Many were shot at different times, in varying weather, of distinct subjects/scenes. They sort of matched, but not really.

Even more disappointing was the fact that I could not rely on official technical documentation to point me in the right direction. Kodak and Fujifilm are very good at publishing their film datasheets, which reveal a lot of scientific information that can be used to compare films. Unfortunately, ColorPlus turned out to be the first Kodak film I could not find a datasheet for.

I had no definitive answer.

Refining test equipment and methods.

Despite Kodak’s incomplete response/documentation and others’ ill-designed comparison attempts aside, I felt close to finally getting an answer.

Gold and ColorPlus are easy films to find. Better yet, I knew how to design a better test — by introducing strict subject, light, and lens control in addition to the existing scanning & image processing controls.

Daren, who owns a Hasselblad 500CM (text linkes to his review of this camera), a tripod, and a digital camera scanning rig with a Negative Lab Pro subscription, agreed to attempt an improved comparison with me.

Here’s how we designed it:

Hasselblad 500CM is a medium format camera with interchangeable backs (similar to Mamiya RZ67). We used this feature to keep the camera fixed on a tripod as we swapped the film backs preloaded with either Gold or ColorPlus. This way, we controlled for variations in the camera optics, scene, and perspective.

We selected flowers, a human subject (me), and a night scene in hopes of pushing the film to reveal any differences in colour rendering, dynamic range, and grain.

Both Gold and ColorPlus films were bought “fresh” (with a few months’ difference in expiration dates). Both films were tested in the 35mm format as ColorPlus is unavailable in 120. We used adapters to mount the film into the Hasselblad backs, which exposed the film as a series of 12 vertical panoramas.

Daren developed both rolls together in the same tank at home. This way, we controlled for any variation in chemicals, temperature, and agitation methods during processing.

We used two colour-negative film digitization methods: 1) a digital camera scan with Sony a7III with the 70mm F2.8 DG Macro Art lens following a proprietary conversion with Negative Lab Pro, and 2) a 198-megapixel composite scan on PrimeFilm XAs, inverted using well-documented stretching technique with no automatic colour correction, which controls for the opaque negative interpretation algorithms which could be secretly skewing the otherwise well-controlled nature of the experiment.

Kodak Gold vs. ColorPlus: grain.

Neither Daren nor I have an electron microscope. Our scanning methods are no different than those of most film photographers who invested in quality home-scanning setups.

I admit I expected to see a clear difference between the films since that’s what the internet is saying: “Grain is ever so slightly more noticeable than Gold.” — Agulliver on Photrio, “Kodak Colorplus has a bit of a more harsh and noticeable grain.” — Max Kent, “Colourplus is a bit grainier and generally more saturated colour. It’s very 80s looking.” — BeardySi on Reddit.

But alas, none of our scans showed any significant difference in the grain.