LomoChrome Color '92 Review | BRAND NEW 35mm Film

In this video, I review the brand new 35mm film stock from Lomography: LomoChrome Color '92. This film boasts a rich, grainy, cool-toned colour pallet with beautifully jewel-toned shadows. It is a 400iso, C41 color film stock that comes on a 36 exposure roll. I show you all my results, including edited and original photos. I compare the results I got with various types of lighting, different subjects, and with different colour pallets. I also compare this film to one of Lomography's other color films, Lomography Color Negative.
I wanted to make this review as comprehensive and thorough as possible, though I only had one roll to experiment with! I would love to hear about other people's experiences with this film down in the comments, and thoughts on how best to shoot with it!
Find me on Instagram (YHanson_Photography) to see more of my film photography in my daily reels :)
Chapters:
00:00 - Intro
01:44 - What I Shot
02:26 - Grain Structure
04:55 - Shadows
06:02 - Color
09:55 - Color 92 vs Color Negative
11:18 - Closing Thoughts

[@lomographicsociety]

Thanks so much for trying out our film and sharing your impressions! We absolutely loved your results when seeing them!! ❤

[@YvonneHansonPhotography]

I'm so glad! Thanks for giving me an opportunity to test it out! :D

[@ArchiesLens]

I love that you showed edited versus your original image. This was super in depth and helpful. I might have to give this film stock a go!🌸✨

[@YvonneHansonPhotography]

I'm glad this was helpful!! I would highly recommend trying it out. It was pretty easy to get the colours where I wanted in photoshop too- a bunch of the edits have like, one tweak and thats it haha

[@VariTimo]

The mud green shadows from Superia mostly come from being scanned with a scanner using a preset designed for Kodak films. When scanned correctly, for example with a Fuji Frontier scanner it has only a slight green tint in the shadows if not underexposed too much. That tint is also cooler than if scanned incorrectly. You can still get warmer greens in the shadows when underexposed or if it’s not corrected right, but with good exposure Superia 400 will give you very even color gradation from shadows to highlights, even at box speed.

[@YvonneHansonPhotography]

That's good to know! I feel like most of the scans ive gotten back have been on the green side, so it's probably my lab's scanner at fault!

[@coryajonesvideo]

I'm impressed. I'm definite going to try this film. So nice to see a new color stock. I had to subscribe because your coverage here is fantastic. Cheers, Yvonne! 🍻💙😁

[@johnleftwich650]

Fantastic review of a fun film stock. Just subscribed so looking forward to your next review.

[@TheVFXbyArt]

Excellent review!!!! TY!!!

[@davidgatchalian885]

Thanks for your extensive testing and comparison to Lomo 400 !

[@YvonneHansonPhotography]

Thanks very much for watching! I'm glad I had a chance to shoot Color negative before I made this video, because it was really interesting to compare them!

[@artistjoh]

I hope they bring it out in 110 format. In 110 I like to both get fine grain like with Peacock developed in E6, and lots of grain, especially with Orca and Metropolis, but this '92 looks like it might be even grainier.

[@Doomedcreatures]

picks are great

[@YvonneHansonPhotography]

Thank you!

[@_buttertigers]

So so helpful. Thanks for making this, especially with that detailed comparison against Lomo's other Colour Neg films! Just curious, which scanner was this that processed these films? Since scanners also have a tendency to affect the colours.

[@YvonneHansonPhotography]

Thank you for watching! I'm really glad you found the comparison section helpful :D unfortunately....I did not scan them myself. It was The Lab in Vancouver, and I'm not sure what they use!

[@JamieMPhoto]

OH you got to test this film!! So amazing!

[@YvonneHansonPhotography]

YA hahahaha I've been so excited to share for SO LONG

[@JamieMPhoto]

Great shots! This film has a wonderful color pallet. I have ordered some, but I am definitely eager to see the 120. This will especially be interesting since I shoot a lot of people ... ha ha. I do have to say, though, the edited skin tone for the model with more melanted skin is phenomenal.

[@YvonneHansonPhotography]

@@JamieMPhoto Yesss it was definitely a bit easier to recover skin tones for her than for Bond (the very pale male model with the fun makeup)- his shots were a bit of a lost cause skintone wise haha. I hope you get some good shots out of your rolls! I really need to start shooting 120 in general tbh...

[@JamieMPhoto]

@@YvonneHansonPhotography So interesting! I'm really excited to try this film in a swimming pool, too. Going to bring some really strong reds and blues with me.

[@YvonneHansonPhotography]

@@JamieMPhoto ooooo that sounds IDEAL. Red swimsuit. Blue pool. Green sunhat. 😍

[@goldenhourkodak]

Wow they really sent this out to everyone! Your shots make me so excited to try it.

[@kevinbaylon7660]

lol I already forgot to ask in my other comment, what K temp did you light your studio shots at? And finally, great shots!

[@senseofeverthing]

You should try to get rid of the colornoise in your scans for better results. I don't now what scanner and software you are using, but when I use my Coolscan I often have to use color-denoise at 25 in Lightroom when scanning dense color positives to achieve clean results. I think this probably has to do with the older CCD sensors, which are awesome for scanning film, but have some weaknesses with lower light levels

[@oversharingturtle4462]

Nah it’s not the colour noise it’s the (sorta trashy) film that’s giving that noise

[@stapledtogether]

Great in depth review! I’ve shot a bunch of expired 35mm and this new stock really kind of looks like expired film.. lots of grain.. slight colour shift.. needs a lot of light.. I wonder where the actual film originated before becoming lomo 🤔

[@YvonneHansonPhotography]

I'd like to investigate that at some point! It does have some of the hallmarks of expired film, but I think the colours overall are a lot richer than a lot of the expired films I've shot with. The cooler tones at least. I see Reddit is already speculating about origins so maybe I will have to do a follow up video one day 😁

[@kevinbaylon7660]

@@YvonneHansonPhotography Analog Insights actually got a reply from the folks at Lomography (see their video pin), saying that 92 is indeed a new, custom emulsion, and not some Kodak or Orwo re-brand as many have speculated... but this makes sense, also given your discussion here on 92's grain structure as well as your vid on Orwo NC400... if anything, Lomography has a contract with InovisCoat, which would help to explain the on-the-surface similarities between this and NC400... looking forward to all the comparison videos between 92 and NC400, or stocks like Metropolis and even Cinestill 800T..

[@housemusic325]

This film give me two idea : Put 85b warming filter on it and try to shoot portrait with orange filter on a flash to warm up the skin tones. It is quite cold but it can be deffinitely helped by a good light. Note : THX for testing it WITH adjustment. Many people do this and other test does not show it.

[@kevinbaylon7660]

yup, i;m thinking of doing this as well...