I understand having fun with different ways of doing things. But not everything makes sense. There are still a lot of good color negative films out there that don't cost as much as Cinevision. And who needs ISO 50 grain? How big are we making our prints, anyway? OK, maybe a movie theater, that's probably where it excels. Shoot Ektar 100, end of story, no remjet.
50D colours are very different to Ektar.
50D colours are very different to Ektar. It is not so much the lack of grain (I don't see it an issue either with Ektar or Portra 160) and the speed is a bit limiting but the colours are different. Could I photoshop Ektar/Portra to look like it? I don't think you can but even if you could then I might as well shoot digital if I am to start doing this, plenty of Kodak and Fuji presets around for Lightroom.
(And to Xmas)What is "different?" Can you tell in a comparison test without knowing the source film? Why is "different" perceived to be "better?" Why would Kodak make movie film to look noticeably "different" than still film? An alternate color palette reality? Does one "need" this "difference" to get a color image that is otherwise lacking in still films? Would an uninformed viewer choose one over the other? Does this difference show up in the spectrographic curves, or is it all in the eye/brain of the beholder?
And let's not forget, if you take the rem jet off before shooting, you no longer are shooting the film as designed. Maybe that's some of the alleged "difference," eh? Light back scatter, etc. And then if you process it in C-41, with or without the rem jet coating while exposing, you again move a step away from what Kodak intended.
Scratch mix ECN-2? Holy cow, what a glutton for punishment................ Presuming one can find the information.
C41 is a cheapskate film for unsuspecting punters to make for simpler mini lab processing. Are you kidding me? Come back to Planet Earth, Xmas. BTW, it's a process and not a film.
The REMJET controls bleed from highlights better - like it did in Kodachrome.
I'd shoot it with REMJET on, there are people here that do that... One even cuts down 62 and 70mm ECN for 220 loads!
The only problem is it is lower contrast for cine positive film.
The normal cine theatres do a good job at projection.
ECN2 formula is easy and open public information on Kodak's site to allow cine labs to operate.
I normally make up chemicals from scratch though some (ECN) are difficult to get and need shipping and need rubber gloves like the mini lab chemicals.
(And to Xmas)What is "different?" Can you tell in a comparison test without knowing the source film? Why is "different" perceived to be "better?" Why would Kodak make movie film to look noticeably "different" than still film? An alternate color palette reality? Does one "need" this "difference" to get a color image that is otherwise lacking in still films? Would an uninformed viewer choose one over the other? Does this difference show up in the spectrographic curves, or is it all in the eye/brain of the beholder?
Oh please, if you can't see a difference in the colour of Ektar, Portra and 50D then, well no point continuing a conversation.
Would choosing 50D over Portra or Ektar magically improve a photo? Of course not. Would I prefer one over the other? Of course I would. If you can't understand that, well whatever. I don't care what an uninformed viewer would chose, I care what I would chose just as much as I don't care what food you like when I order at the restaurant. It is called "choice" and "personal preference".
I've never shot a Cinestill, so I'm not qualified to make a statement from experience.
OK, so it has a different look just as Portra does from Ektar does from Fujicolor. Got it. My point isn't that, but does it matter? Will it make a superior image? Will people, especially the public, know? To say nothing of that to do it right, as intended, you need to shoot with the rem jet on and then go for that $42 per roll ECN-2 processing. Or, as Xmas suggests, mix your own, and then what do you have versus any other good color negative film?
I just try to sort out subjectivity from objectivity. If it's a nuance that generally won't be noticed, I'm saying take the easier route.
Yet you feel qualified to deride those that do like it and dismiss it as irrelevant. Nice.
When you eat do you ever think that you'd like to eat something nice or do you just go by nutritional value alone and then stick it in the microwave?
As for processing, the whole point of Cinestill and what the OP has created is that it is C41 so what on earth are you talking about?
Might as well shoot digital then.
I do all my own processing and mix ECN-2 chemistry from scratch regularly. You need CD-3 and otherwise standard chemicals for developers. It is no harder to process than C-41 and remjet is a non-issue; it is easily removed during processing. See other threads here.
Is it better than Portra or Ektar or .... That depends on what you want. I feel 5207 is very wide latitude (14+ stops advertised) and a very forgiving film. It scans with essentially no grain. Tweak the process timing of the color developer to taste - I go about 10% longer than spec - and there is plenty of contrast for optical prints. Colors are just beautiful and saturation is high without being over the top.
I like to think of it as slide film with latitude.
I have not used 5201 or 5203 but I have over 1000 feet of 5207 on ice and also some of the 500T.
FPPs prices ARE about 4x direct from Ekta but you can get a 100 ft roll at a tolerable price. Otherwise you can hunt eBay or find a place that sells short ends - not as easy as it sounds. There a quite a few vendors of rolled films. FPPs sells 24 exposure rolls but I don't feel the price is that great, although I buy quite a bit from FPP in general.
why you felt it necessary to mix ECN-2 instead of just using readily available C-41 chemistry
If you do the hybrid thing, it won't matter.
printing to RA-4 with standard times, the negatives will be of low contrast
a positive print out the the theaters
Oh, please. "Might as well shoot digital" because I'm askance that a film designed for ECN-2 and rem jet has the latter removed ahead of shooting and then is processed in C-41? Cut me/us some logical slack.
I would never criticize anyone for exploring, trying, pushing the envelopes. Or, just having fun. No problemo. But don't try to blow smoke up my orifice that even after remjet removal prior to shooting and then processing in C-41 you have a product superior to conventional good color neg films, especially Ektar. If that was the case, surely someone at Kodak would have had a light bulb go on.
As someone mentioned upstream, yes, Kodachrome had rem jet. I lean towards thinking that rem jet is sort of an insurance policy and something good. Cool. But just like real insurance policies, we don't all need a million dollar umbrella policy.
Hi PaulI just bought a roll each of 250D and 500T films from the Film Photography Project. $6.99 each, no problem, but then I noticed that these reloads are only 27 exposures! How weird is that? I let them know that I thought so, and to not give us another 20 cents of stock (I worked the numbers,) is sort of cheating.
The good news is that their cheapest shipping is $2.72.
My C-41 is all mixed up and ready to go.
If I get all crazy and can't live without a rem-jetted film, any ideas how to take a Kodak 400' roll and peel off 100' for the bulk loader?
@Xmas: Thanks for the voice of experience! I guess I knew I could keep my arms in that changing bag for a long time and slowly move the film from one roll to the other, I was hoping that there was a faster method. You know, like using a 35mm film editor..........which of course is expensive and won't fit into a changing bag! Regardless, that you have done so gives me hope! And I no longer have any film cans or hubs. I suspect I'll just count bulk loader crank handle revolutions, feed directly from the big reel to the film cassette.
It will be awhile when or if I do this. I'll have to shoot those two rolls I bought, evaluate, if if I think worth the effort of making a significant investment into film and then dealing with home processing and rem jet forever more. etc. etc.
I'm not going to the trouble and expense of making ECN-2 developer. C-41 is just fine for me. Negatives will be scanned, so many sins can be absolved. Including shooting 500T in daylight. When I used to routinely shoot ECN, living ten miles from one of many Hollywood labs processing this, you would tell them that it was shot with or without a color correction filter. They didn't care one way or the other, but knowing how it was shot let them dial in color correction easily.
No idea what a dyson is. Never had a clean bulk loader scratch film.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?