Up until now, I have never used Fujicolor Super HG 1600. In my college photography days and later, I tended to expose film at ISO 200 or lower. If I remember correctly, high-speed films were expensive. I found a roll of Fujicolor Super HG 1600 in the box of expired 35mm film gifted to me. My success bolstered my confidence with a 35mm cartridge of expired Fujichrome PROVIA 400F. On a rainy day, I loaded an expired roll of Fujicolor Super HG 1600 and drove around a neighbourhood loop, trying to calm my nerves.
Fujicolor Super HG 1600 was a colour 35mm negative film manufactured by Fujifilm. It was designed for use in low-light conditions and situations requiring high shutter speeds. The film had an ASA rating of 1600, which made it highly sensitive to light and ideal for capturing fast-moving subjects with minimal blur. I estimated that the expired Fujicolor Super HG 1600 roll was 20 years old, so I exposed the film at ASA 400, one-stop every ten years past the expiration date.
Despite its high sensitivity, Fujicolor Super HG 1600 had a fine grain structure, which allowed for sharp and detailed images. The film had a wide exposure latitude, which means it could handle overexposure and underexposure well, providing flexibility in difficult lighting conditions. The film was known for its natural colour reproduction, with accurate and vivid colours that are true to life. Fujicolor Super HG 1600 had high contrast, which helped enhance the details and textures in images.
Its ability to handle various exposure settings and its natural colour reproduction made it a popular choice among professionals and hobbyists. I loaded the Fujicolor Super HG 1600 cartridge into my Minolta X-700. The cartridge was listed as having only 12 frames, but I got 14. This is the first time I have exposed a roll of 35mm film with less than 24 frames.
The film was developed at Boutique Film Lab and scanned using my standard 35mm film scanning workflow. The results were better than I achieved with expired Fujichrome PROVIA 400F. There is a lot more grain, and the scans were underexposed. Would I have achieved better results had I overexposed at ASA 200? Is the film grain normal for ASA 1600 film? I’m not sure. Based on my experience so far, expired ASA 400 has provided the best results.
What do you think?
|Name||Fujicolor Super HG 1600|
|Features||Fine grain.Natural colour reproduction. High contrast|
|Lab||Boutique Film Lab|
|Scanner||Epson Perfection V600|
|Software||VueScan 9, Negative Lab Pro, Adobe Lightroom|
fishyfisharcade11th April 2023 at 11:58 AM
I think that higher ASA films suffer from degradation more than less sensitive variants. I've not shot expired film rated higher than 400asa before but if I do, based on your experience here, I think I'd now look to give it an extra stop or more of overexposure even beyond the two stops you allowed.
Khürt Williams13th April 2023 at 12:27 PM
I exposed an expired roll of Kodak Max Zoom 800 35mm film in 2021, and I got disappointing results. I will avoid any 35mm film with ASA above 400.