One of the coolest things about the online film community is the generosity of film photographers. Last year I emailed Natalie Smart, a Brighton UK film photographer after reading one of her blog posts. Seeing that she had just purchased a Hasselblad 500 C/M, I had several original Hasselblad brochures, and some other film items I thought she might be interested in, so I sent them to her. Natalie asked how she could return the favor and I asked for one of her darkroom prints. In return, she not only sent me a print, but several film-related items. One item she sent was a roll of Lomography Berlin Kino 400 film.
I’ve had an interesting experience with Lomography film over the years. Whenever I’ve shot with Lomo film, my shots have never looked anything like what they’ve advertised. Even when processed at a lab, my colors don’t look the same, or the black and white contrast is just meh. With the Berlin Kino, I decided to shoot it at box speed, and develop with CineStill DF96 Monobath. This is probably the first time I got what I expected with Lomo film. The film has a lot of grain. And the contrast is either just right or too little. And that’s exactly what I’ve seen in other examples of this film.
Camera: Leica M3 (1959)
Film: Lomography Berlin Kino 400
Process: CineStill DF96 Monobath
Scanned: Epson V700 Photo
Utah Film Photography 
I have similar experiences with Lomo films. After experimenting with their color negative 400 and 800 I went back to Portra for more consistent results. I use Berlin 400 more often, but still don’t always know what I’m going to get. However I’ve mostly shot 35mm and now have some 120 rolls of Berlin I’m anxious to try to see if I like it better in medium format.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s good to hear that I’m not the only one with mixed results. Berlin would be excellent for street photography in my opinion.
LikeLike
Great to see the photos Shaun. Thanks for sharing 👍
LikeLike