This Film Simulation Recipe is modeled after some prints I found in a box that I thought looked interesting. I didn’t initially know what film had been used, but after locating the negatives I discovered it was something called Kodak GT 800-3, and I had no idea what that was. After much sleuthing, I found out it was Kodak Max Zoom 800, also known as Max 800. The film was shot in 2006 (I believe by my wife), and it was the third and final iteration of the emulsion (this version was introduced in 2000). Max Zoom 800 was replaced in 2006 by the similar Max Versatility Plus 800 (which was around for five or six years before its discontinuation).
Kodak made Max 800 film for point-and-shoot and disposable cameras—specifically, they marketed it for point-and-shot cameras with a zoom lens, which exaggerated camera shake. It was a cheap high-ISO consumer color negative film intended for the novice. It had a large latitude for underexposure and (especially) overexposure, but color reproduction was a little different (some have said “bland” or “weird”) when compared to other Kodak films. Kodak intended the film to be printed on Ektacolor Edge paper, but my samples were printed on Fujicolor Crystal Archive paper (which certainly affects the aesthetic)—this recipe is modeled after my samples.
This Kodak Max 800 recipe is compatible with the Fujifilm X-Pro3, X100V, X-T4, X-S10, X-E4, and X-T30 II cameras. Because it uses the Classic Negative film simulation and Clarity, it is not compatible with the X-T3 and X-T30, unfortunately. For those with the X-H2s, it’s my understanding that this recipe is completely compatible and renders near identically, but I have not tested it to know for certain. Those with newer GFX cameras can use it, too, although it will render a little differently.
Classic Negative
Dynamic Range: DR400
Highlight: -2
Shadow: +1
Color: -1
Noise Reduction: -4
Sharpness: -2
Clarity: -4
Grain Effect: Strong, Small
Color Chrome Effect: Strong
Color Chrome Effect Blue: Off
White Balance: 7300K, -5 Red & -2 Blue
ISO: Auto, up to ISO 6400
Exposure Compensation: 0 to +2/3 (typically)
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs captured using this “Kodak Max 800” Film Simulation Recipe on my Fujifilm X-E4:
Find this Film Simulation Recipe and over 200 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
The colors have a pleasing density to them. About the subtle differences I think that was part of what made film a bit unique, many variables shifting a bit the outputs. In this case different fujifilm sensors.
It’s interesting how there are subtle differences when the light changes a little. Sometimes it can produce almost an underexposed (but corrected when printed) aesthetic. Thank you for the input!
I happen to have a very old unexposed roll of something called “Max 800.” When one my film cams finishes a roll I’ll go ahead and shoot it next to the same subjects, settings and lenses using your recipe to see how the scans compare to the JPGs.
Sounds fun! Be sure to check out this article:
https://www.popphoto.com/guide-to-shooting-expired-film/
Thanks for the link. It was a good read. I’ll probably rate the stuff around ISO300.
Any chance of getting this for the X-trans III sensor? Its gorgeous but I don’t have the camera for it ;(
Unfortunately it requires the Classic Negative film sim, and there’s not a good substitute for Classic Negative. Sorry.
I really liked to look of this recipe but have an X-T30. I tried using the Classic Chrome film simulation instead (and don’t have the clarity setting) and was pleased with the results. It’s not the same, but has a lovely look and feel nonetheless. Thanks!
Glad that you found a way to make it work for you! 😀
I really liked the look of this recipe but have an X-T30. I tried using the Classic Chrome setting instead (and don’t have clarity) and was pretty pleased with the results. The images don’t look the same but have a really nice look and feel nonetheless. Thanks!