This Kodak High Definition Plus 200 film simulation recipe was a fun one to make. My wife, Amanda, was looking through an old box of pictures when she came across a group of prints that she thought looked interesting, so she showed them to me. The images were captured in the Sierra Nevada mountains, largely in the Sequoia National Forest, in 2006. I had no idea what film I used, but after locating the negatives, I discovered it was Kodak High Definition Plus 200. The pictures were printed on Fujicolor Crystal Archive paper. Not surprisingly, Fujifilm paper produces a different aesthetic than Kodak paper, so if this film had been printed on Kodak paper the pictures would look a little different. Back then, the rule of thumb for best results was that Kodak negatives should be printed on Kodak paper, Fujifilm negatives should be printed on Fujifilm paper, etc., but obviously I broke that “rule” with these travel pictures.
Kodak High Definition Plus 200 was a color negative film that was also sold under the name Kodak Royal Supra 200. At the time, Kodak claimed that it was the sharpest and finest-grained ISO 200 color negative film on the market. Originally there were ISO 100, 200, 400 and 800 varieties, but since this film line was introduced right at the beginning of the decline of film, it didn’t take Kodak long to discontinue all but the ISO 200 and 400 versions, and even those didn’t last all that long. I shot a few rolls of the film, and after digging through that photo box, I found two sets of negatives, both exposed around that same timeframe. I honestly don’t remember all that much from the experience, but it was fun to rediscover these long-forgotten pictures and recreate the aesthetic on my Fujifilm X-E4 camera.
For ISO 200 color negative film, Kodak High Definition Plus 200 was indeed pretty sharp and fine-grained. It was moderately vibrant (just a little above “true to life”) and contrasty but not overly contrasty. From what I can tell, it didn’t have as large of an exposure latitude as some of Kodak’s other color negative films. It was warm, but seemed to lean more towards green than red when printed on Fujicolor paper. Obviously, how the film is shot, developed, printed and/or scanned will affect how it looks (I apologize for my poor quality scan above, which doesn’t do the picture justice whatsoever, but I wanted to share it anyway). This recipe mimics how I shot the film in 2006, printed on Fujicolor paper. It is compatible with the Fujifilm X-Pro3, X100V, X-T4, X-S10, X-E4, and X-T30 II cameras.
Classic Chrome
Dynamic Range: DR400
Highlight: 0
Shadow: +1
Color: +2
Noise Reduction: -4
Sharpening: 0
Clarity: -3
Grain Effect: Weak, Small
Color Chrome Effect: Weak
Color Chrome Effect Blue: Weak
White Balance: 4800K, -2 Red & -7 Blue
ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400
Exposure Compensation: +1/3 to +2/3 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs using this Kodak High Definition Plus 200 film simulation recipe on my Fujifilm X-E4 & Fujifilm X100V:
Find this film simulation recipe and many more on the Fuji X Weekly — Film Recipes App!
Help Fuji X Weekly
Nobody pays me to write the content found on fujixweekly.com. There’s a real cost to operating and maintaining this site, not to mention all the time that I pour into it. If you appreciated this article, please consider making a one-time gift contribution. Thank you!
$2.00
Fujifilm so nice
I agree!
how important are clarity settings in general to the recipe results? Im asking because it seems like having anything non 0 causes the pictures to take 1-2 sec to store once the shutter is pressed.
How important is the clarity setting? I noticed having anything non 0 set causes a 1-2 sec delay storing the photo upon pressing the shutter.
I guess what really matters is how important it is for you. If it’s not all that important, it’s definitely ok to set it to 0. Or, for a Recipe with minus Clarity like this, try a 10% CineBloom filter (in lieu of Clarity) for a similar affect.
Hey Ritchie
I’ve been a photographer for a long time and I know about shooting with film and how to get certain results through processing etc. However, I just came across some work, again, by Sarah Moon and, guess what I’m going to ask… is there a way to get something like her work with a film simulation recipe? Just checking… thank you for all of your great work.
My initial answer is no, it’s not possible, but it might depend on the specific Sarah Moon photo your thinking about. There’s a possibility to potentially get somewhat close to a couple of them—maybe—I’m just not certain.
Getting quiet the blueish tint with this recipe for overcast conditions
This Recipe is most intended for sunny daylight situations, but I have gotten good results in overcast light. It certainly can have a blue or blue-green tint. I think how well it works or doesn’t work depends on the exact light situation.
Hello, I stumbled upon this article when researching the High Definition Plus 200 film.
I, as you, found a film I had exposed a long time ago (in 2005), with exactly the same edge markings and text (“HIGHDEFINITION PLUS 200”) as the ones present in your photo. I wondered which film that really was and started some research.
I would like to share my findings with you as they are rather surprising.
My result is that the negatives at hand, both yours and mine, are *not* Kodak films, but rather Polaroid-branded Agfa films.
Let me explain how I came to this conclusion.
While researching, I found out that there were two very similarly named films:
– Kodak High Definition 200. This is the one you are referring to in your article and tracing the history of. You can find its datasheet here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20070308082017/https://www.kodak.com/global/en/consumer/products/techInfo/e7017/e7017.shtml
Note how in the description, it says that the edgeprint is “KODAK HD 200”, “HD 200 KODAK”, or “KODAK FILM”. This is not the one on your negative.
The packaging must have looked something like this:
https://industrieplus.net/dxdatabase/rech.php?dx=315254
– Polaroid High Definition Plus 200. Note how the name, like your negative, carries the “Plus”. This was a film manufactured by Agfa in Germany for the Polaroid brand. (See the original box this film came in – it says “Made in Germany by AGFAPhoto”: https://www.ebay.de/itm/175484542698)
You can tell this origin by the green triangles between the perforations in your negative which are typical for Agfa.
The most compelling argument is the least obvious: the barcode at the lower edge of your negative. When decoded, it yields the DX number 46-6, which indeed suggests an Agfa product. If you’d like to know more about this topic, let me know – it’s rather intricate…
So, unknowingly, you recreated the looks of a completely different film than the one you expected – I like that! It must be said that the film market, at its heydays, was hard to overlook at best and wildly confusing at worst, and these are the consequences we’re facing now… 🙂
All the best from what used to be AGFAland!
Leonard
Oh, that’s quite interesting! Those negatives have yet to be unpacked since my move, but I’ll take another look once I locate them. It is possible, if they were sold at Walmart, that it may have been chosen in a pinch (out of film in the camera and out of money in the wallet 🤣). Thanks for this insight, it’s very fascinating!