Decided To Try Some Kodak 5222, er, I Mean CineStill Double X

[Andrew O'Neill]

 

[Saganich]

Nice, I haven't noticed those 'dots' in the kodak 35mm 400' rolls 35mm, but I will look closer. The D96 looks good. I've been using D23 but mixed up a batch of D96 the other day to try out.

 

[snusmumriken]

Nice results. The shadows in your photos look emptier than I experience with this film (and I use a value of 320 ISO); but as you say, that probably reflects metering styles.

I haven't seen those wipe-off dots. I bought my first two rolls of Double-X from Flic Film, but then bought a 400ft roll to spool myself. I can't imagine why CineStill repackaged Double-X would have anything 'extra'. I haven't noticed ragged edges either, but my experience is with 35mm.

 

[otto.f]

Thanks again Andy. I just don’t understand what you mean with empty shadows where you also say that it has good shadow details. Do you mean that the blacks aren’t deep?

 

[braxus]

Results look good. I too was wanting to do a video on the 120 film and bought my rolls a couple years ago, but never got around to it. You beat me to it Andy! Might be incentive to get on it for me. I will only be able to use Xtol though.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Thanks again Andy. I just don’t understand what you mean with empty shadows where you also say that it has good shadow details. Do you mean that the blacks aren’t deep?

Empty shadows due to my choice of metering...Especially for the interior shots. I should have used my reflective metre. The shadows for those ones were empty. The shadows for the outside shots were fine.

 

[henryyjjames]

Nice results. The shadows in your photos look emptier than I experience with this film (and I use a value of 320 ISO); but as you say, that probably reflects metering styles.

I haven't seen those wipe-off dots. I bought my first two rolls of Double-X from Flic Film, but then bought a 400ft roll to spool myself. I can't imagine why CineStill repackaged Double-X would have anything 'extra'. I haven't noticed ragged edges either, but my experience is with 35mm.

I've rerolled 800 feet of Kodak Double-X and never had any issues. It's the same thing that CineStill does, except they rip people off.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I've rerolled 800 feet of Kodak Double-X and never had any issues. It's the same thing that CineStill does, except they rip people off.

CineStill Double X costs me $25 Canadian for a 120 roll! That's the most I've ever spent for 120! But I imagine if Kodak sold it in 120, it would cost about the same...