5222 film

Jarin Blaschke said:

I'm sure the working speed had to do with it. In films, cinematographers are accustomed to usually working at ei 500, and now, as most shoot digitally, ei 800. Most younger DPs now would likely even struggle to light at Double-X's 160 asa in Tungsten light.

I'm not sure if it looks "classic" to my eye, at least projected, it had a watered down, brothy look like a low-con filter, virtually no mid tone separation or local contrast. The grain was large but soft and ill defined, like a high solvent developer look. Yech.

However, it might be very good or even beautiful for certain films, like a soft, foggy, quiet lighthouse film, or depicting great mystery and "the other" where things need toy feel distant. Bergman and Nykvist, and many others, used the stock to great effect. It just wouldn't be my first choice (if any still existed) for most subject matter. But that's just my taste.


J

Click to expand...

Not noticed any of that subjective stuff and my can says 200EI at 3200K?

Gerald C Koch said:

At one time Eastman also made Plus-X 5231 and XT Pan 5220 cine films. Both were very nice and I miss them for still camera use. I still have several hundred feet of 5231 in my freezer.

Have faith fellow luddites. Vinyl records are making a comeback with a major manufacturer offering a new turntable. Perhaps there is hope for film.

Click to expand...

Yes I have friends some doing vinyl and some wet plates but film is a different level of technology.
Ive only got about 200 feet of 5222 left.

A curious question to Jarin Blaschke, above, have you used either of the current Orwo b+w cine stocks and, if so, how does that seem in practice? Or even Foma, if that one is still made.

MartinP said:

A curious question to Jarin Blaschke, above, have you used either of the current Orwo b+w cine stocks and, if so, how does that seem in practice? Or even Foma, if that one is still made.

Click to expand...

Some still people using Orwo already

Dead Link Removed

Try email to foma as debit card sales of even 30.5m cams are profitable... And Harman do Kentmere and other films in 30,5m lengths.

Ah. I was 1/3 off. Haven't shot it since 2005. I just recall it being 1/3 slower in tungsten than in daylight. I have not tried the Orwo. I would love to but I haven't been hired on a project that shoots black and white since the aforementioned film in 2005. If that ever happened I'd first look to see if Ilford could bulk load FP4 and with the correct sprockets - motion picture films have slightly different 35mm sprockets for more steadiness passing through the camera.

J

Jarin Blaschke said:

Ah. I was 1/3 off. Haven't shot it since 2005. I just recall it being 1/3 slower in tungsten than in daylight. I have not tried the Orwo. I would love to but I haven't been hired on a project that shoots black and white since the aforementioned film in 2005. If that ever happened I'd first look to see if Ilford could bulk load FP4 and with the correct sprockets - motion picture films have slightly different 35mm sprockets for more steadiness passing through the camera.

J

Click to expand...

Ok last years 5222 can says

250 EI day
200 EI 3200K

Your memory not that bad...

Ilford (as was) stopped doing HP5+ in 1000 foot Bell and Howell perforations (2003 or there about), still have some left. Thay also quoted two speeds, forgotten...

Orwo were still doing two emulsions in 400 and 1000 foot B&H last year.

Foma maybe B&H donno

http://www.foma.cz/en/catalogue-fomapan-100-classic-detail-406

but maybe 80 EI for 0.6

Noel

For still camera use the difference in speed between daylight and tungsten light is insignificant. The 1/3 stop is well within the latitude of the film. It must be remembered that exposure control is limited in cine cameras since there is no shutter speed adjustment possible. In addition exposure is more critical for cine use. That is the reason that two speeds are listed. B&W still films also show a similar speed difference but this is usually not specified unless the difference it is large.

A bit of numbering on the 4 x 5 Eastman effort. Quantity numbers went from a slice or two of a master roll to buy the whole roll.

51 inches by a mile length is a very very big stack of 4 x 5 to pack..... (-;

The exposure difference may be "insignificant", but it' s worth setting your meter to the correct speed. With very warm light (say, lighting diffused through unbleached muslin), the speed is very probably even lower. Maybe it's even a touch higher when exposing under pure skylight, who knows.

The old black and white stocks, such as 5222, have had little or no R&D in decades, so it's effectively a vintage stock, and the latitude can't even remotely compare to a contemporary stock like the Vision3 series or with the Alexa digital system. I found that I had to be very careful with exposing and lighting 5222 and 5231 or it fell apart quickly.

Actually, you can easily and significantly alter the shutter speed in cinematography, in both analog and even more so digital capture. The standard is a rotating shutter, where the maximum opening is 180 degrees (or 210 degrees with a Panaflex), which provides a 1/48 shutter speed at 24fps. Depending on the camera, it can be narrowed down in frequent increments to as much as 11 degrees, which by my late-night calculation is 1/768th of a second. however, audiences are visually accustomed to the 1/48th look and so anything outside of that is considered a special "look." The battle scenes in Saving Private Ryan are the most famous example of this (between 22.5 and 90 degree shutter), although it was an action scene trend well into the 2000s.

Thus, ND filters are used widely to most accurately control exposure when you want consistency of stop/depth of field/sharpness throughout a film. Many lenses, very especially older ones can become totally different lenses at different stops, as you know. During partially cloudy days, the dance of ND filters can be maddening, but my method is to choose an f-stop for a film and never stray more than a 1/2 stop in either direction for said consistency. All apertures in my last film were between 2 3/4 and 2.8 3/4 for example. Exceptions were certain less-narrative landscape shots where soft foreground elements might be distracting and working with real candlelight where I had a few high speed lenses on hand but even then softness becomes objectionable to my eye below 1.4 3/4 with a "vintage" lens.

Cinematography can be exposed very precisely, between the widespread use of lighting and the use of T-stops instead of F-stops. It's kind of funny that people try to exercise such precise exposure control in zone system photography, when they don't know the actual transmission of the lens, just the crude size of the aperture opening. This additional level of precision is required in cinematography because of the directly viewed shot-to shot consistency required and also the large viewing size of the finished image where differences in shadow detail and noise are greatly exaggerated. That said, the current recording materials have an uncanny level of latitude and newer generations of cinematographers by and large do not exercise the same level of technical craft as their predecessors.

J

If a 1/3 stop between the daylight and tungsten speeds of a film were really important then all BW film manufacturers would list both speeds. All BW films have from this problem. I do stress that there are a few still films using older sensitization dyes that do list two speeds. But this is due to a wider discrepancy then a 1/3 stop between the two speeds. One must always ask whether something like a 1/3 stop is important is light of the errors inherent in mechanical shutters which may be of comparable importance.

I suppose in a perfect world that this concern is valid. But one must also consider color temperature of the light, the inaccuracy of mechanical shutters in still cameras, ... If exposure is critical then there are many other things to worry about. Other films also have a discrepancy it just isn't usually specified by the manufacturer.

With cine cameras shutter speed can be changed but this is usually in relation to the frame rate. Thus as mentioned ND filters are commonly used.

Gerald C Koch said:

I suppose in a perfect world that this concern is valid. But one must also consider color temperature of the light, the inaccuracy of mechanical shutters in still cameras, ... If exposure is critical then there are many other things to worry about. Other films also have a discrepancy it just isn't usually specified by the manufacturer.

With cine cameras shutter speed can be changed but this is usually in relation to the frame rate. Thus as mentioned ND filters are commonly used.

Click to expand...

The cine people are indeed worried about the 1/3 of a stop to allow eg jump cuts. For reasons mentioned above. They have to contact print the whole shoot at the same exposure.

The slower speed was with 3200K studio light, voltage control etc. and during day you would need a colour temp meter.

The typical pro cine camera has a sector shutter with variable speed just like stills camera but pretty exact even through frame rate changes.

The lenses T specified...

They live in a different world.

The shutter speeds I gave in the last thread all apply to the camera running at 24 frames per second. The shutter angle is just another control available, independent of running speed.

Even though there are plenty of sloppy cinematographers of late (and many greats as well), cinematography is set up to be be a much more precise craft, maybe that's why they bothered to list the two speeds on the double-X can. Plus-X cine film also had two speeds (80 and 64) for the two spectrums of light, even though it may have been the same film, or a certain generation as the still version film plus rem jet backing. There is much more at stake, and the technicians much more qualified on a typical film than the typical photographer and their photo shoot (plenty of exceptions, of course). The cameras and optics are much more precise as well. The shutter variations deemed acceptable in the typical still camera would be an utter disaster in a motion picture camera. Their running speed and shutter speed is accurate to at least 1/1000th of a second. Each released modern cine lens is tested for precise actual light transition at each stop, as you would want to expect from a $10,000 - $35,000 lens. Compare this to your average Nikon or even Leica still lens.

Anyway, in still photography, maybe for a lot of images 1/3 stop is not a big deal most of the time, but for a delicate or dark low-key scene I would want to know exactly where I lose shadow detail and would be grateful that the manufacturer gave me the correct speed of the film for the light involved. At least one less variable. I suppose any diligent photographer or cinematographer should adequately test their materials for their methods and find out what the real speed is for their uses. Gordon Willis was particularly good at this.

Did Efke not give different color temp speeds for their "ortho-panchromatic" films?

Jarin Blaschke said:

The shutter speeds I gave in the last thread all apply to the camera running at 24 frames per second. The shutter angle is just another control available, independent of running speed.

Even though there are plenty of sloppy cinematographers of late (and many greats as well), cinematography is set up to be be a much more precise craft, maybe that's why they bothered to list the two speeds on the double-X can. Plus-X cine film also had two speeds (80 and 64) for the two spectrums of light, even though it may have been the same film, or a certain generation as the still version film plus rem jet backing. There is much more at stake, and the technicians much more qualified on a typical film than the typical photographer and their photo shoot (plenty of exceptions, of course). The cameras and optics are much more precise as well. The shutter variations deemed acceptable in the typical still camera would be an utter disaster in a motion picture camera. Their running speed and shutter speed is accurate to at least 1/1000th of a second. Each released modern cine lens is tested for precise actual light transition at each stop, as you would want to expect from a $10,000 - $35,000 lens. Compare this to your average Nikon or even Leica still lens.

Anyway, in still photography, maybe for a lot of images 1/3 stop is not a big deal most of the time, but for a delicate or dark low-key scene I would want to know exactly where I lose shadow detail and would be grateful that the manufacturer gave me the correct speed of the film for the light involved. At least one less variable. I suppose any diligent photographer or cinematographer should adequately test their materials for their methods and find out what the real speed is for their uses. Gordon Willis was particularly good at this.

Did Efke not give different color temp speeds for their "ortho-panchromatic" films?

Click to expand...

Yea when I worked on Noah, Matt Libatique was constantly checking and re-checking the lighting and metering with both his spot, his incident and reflected light meter and sometimes even checking using a 5d MK3, he carried all of them on him at all times. Those scenes in the boat were truly very dim, I even had to get a tan to match the other skin tones on set because I was like a stop off from the others! Haha

It was intense but one of the best and most elaborate sets I've ever been on. But it was dark as hell... Especially the serpent floor!

Jarin Blaschke said:

Plus-X cine film also had two speeds (80 and 64) for the two spectrums of light, even though it may have been the same film, or a certain generation as the still version film plus rem jet backing.

Click to expand...

Hate to pick a point with an expert, but my understanding is that 5231 like all the other B&W films did not have a rem-jet backing. That is reserved for the colour stocks, and these days mostly for the Camera Negative. The colour print stock had it at one time, but the process was revised to reduce water consumption. Which is also why they went away from Silver sound tracks to the cyan dye tracks.

Still Plux-x has an AHU layer, but that is decoloured in normal development. I never got any 5231 to try in the still camera.