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