DX Coding for CineStill XX and others

Hi all,

This is what I am currently pondering and I am wondering if anyone else has some thoughts to share.


Context: I am bulk-loading a few 400' rolls of film (Double-X, Vision3 250D and Ektachrome). I am loading them into recycled lab canisters, which I have been collecting from my friends at the local lab and sorting through. This film will be used and processed by students.

My thought is this: I should load the films into a canister that has the correct DX coding for the ISO and exposure number— in case whoever is shooting it does not have a camera that can manually set the ISO.* I settled on using the following canisters for each film type:
VISION 250D = CineStill 400D canisters
EXTACHROME = ProImage 100 canisters, Ektar 100 canisters
DOUBLE X = either Kodak 200 canisters or Kodak 400 canisters.

For the 250D, I've thought through the exposure rating and chemistry process times, etc... and I've settled on that rating and canisters, so I won't has out my thoughts, unless someone is curious.
The canisters for Ektachrome seem obvious to me since I don't have empty Ektachrome canisters, I'll just use the other two Kodak 100 rated canisters.
The Double-X is where I am a little conflicted.

After inspecting the CineStill XX coding, I realized that their DX code is for 800. They do say that the film can be rated between 200 and 800, but they choose to go with 800 as the DX code. Curious. Does anyone think there's a specific reason why they opted for 800? why not 400 which is in the middle? Or why not 250 because that's what the original rating for Double-X is?
Before I realized that they put 800 on the canisters, I collected Kodak 200 canisters and Kodak 400 canisters from the lab, thinking I would do one or the other, or both. Now I'm reconsidering. Should I go find lots of 800 canisters? Rolling them into CineStill XX canisters is not possible due to the volume of used canisters I would need, and there aren't that many being processed at the lab. I'm now leading towards just rolling it into the 400-coded canisters and skipping the 200.


What are your thoughts? I'm curious to know.




Side question: What is the point of having exposure tolerance on the DX coding? What does the camera use that information for?


*This is a separate issue but not what I am addressing here.

Why 800?
Simple cameras will more likely function in poor lighting, rather than give a 'low light warning,' thus promoting customer satisfaction and improved sales.
People using simple cameras are not likely sophisticated enough to realize the poor shadow detail.

Personally, I wouldn't go by CineStill's ratings. They give a higher rating for the Kodak films, but they use cross processes for the Vision series. I would actually use the 250D as the EI200. About 5222 - they themselves say the following:

"It has a variable base sensitivity of ISO 250 under daylight (5500K) and ISO 200 under tungsten lighting (3200K), and can be rated up to ISO 1600 with the appropriate processing compensation."

Click to expand...

which is true. The annoying thing though is that they put DX 800 on the cartridges. Just ignore their quiet madness.
Choose DX coded cartridges near the Kodak rating.

henryyjjames said:

Side question: What is the point of having exposure tolerance on the DX coding? What does the camera use that information for?


*This is a separate issue but not what I am addressing here.

Click to expand...

It tells the camera that there is slide film loaded - which can be useful if the exposure choices are to be weighted toward either more exposure or less.

MattKing said:

It tells the camera that there is slide film loaded - which can be useful if the exposure choices are to be weighted toward either more exposure or less.

Click to expand...

although most of the DX cameras in my collection seem to only have the conctors to read the ISO side of the line. Only My EOS 1n reads the connd line , and will rewind after 24 exposures if a 24 exposure cassette is loaded no mater what the actual length of the film is.

As for 5222, the rating is 250D and 200T when processed as a cine film. if you were to slightly push it and develop to the contrast of a typical still film, I suspect that you could get away at 400. BUT that is an advanced topic for a basic learn to take pictures course.

Freestyle does sell 250 ISO labels as another way forward, But when I tried them, they have to be placed with extreme care to get stright and Flat.

Why not get your students to print their own DX labels, thereby both educating and empowering them?

You can also buy them ready-made, eg CameraActive

PS - Personally, I wouldn’t expose Double-X at 800 myself. I think it will only lead to a lot of impenetrable shadow. With my equipment and metering style I get 320, which is already a tad higher than most folk use.

snusmumriken said:

PS - Personally, I wouldn’t expose Double-X at 800 myself. I think it will only lead to a lot of impenetrable shadow. With my equipment and metering style I get 320, which is already a tad higher than most folk use.

Click to expand...

+1: I shoot 5222 at box speed because it gives me good latitude and nice rich blacks. If I want to push a film way up there I use HP5.