Eastman Double - X? What can it bring to the table?

hoffy · Jul 10, 2012

After reading the post (there was a url link here which no longer exists) by Mustafa, I have to admit, I am a tad bit curious about Eastman 5222 Double-X 35mm film.

What I really would like to know is exactly what does it bring to the table? If I use this, will all my shots look like they come from Schindler's List? Who uses it here and is it worth the hassle obtaining and shooting through the relatively long lengths of the film?

Cheers

Newt_on_Swings · Jul 10, 2012

It has an old timey look and feel too it. The tones are quite nice shot at 100-200 speed. I personally like it best in rodinal and d76. I do not like the look of it pushed, even slightly to 400, but there are many who shoot it at this speed.

For a student photographer, you just cannot beat the price if you bulk load plus the 30% off kodak educational discount if you are in the USA (must be student and fax order with school purchasing order).

Its good stuff, a bit of a pain with the long rolls, but it is unique because of this, and the history behind it aswell. Also since its cine film, I have no worries cranking it through a trigger winder, or powerful motordrive. It also dries flat.

I have been working through about 1000ft of this myself. I have given away a number of these rolls to friends for them to try. Maybe if you can find someone where you are, you can shoot a roll and see if your up to taking that path. 400ft = ~80 rolls, which is very manageable and not that much actually. 1000ft = ~200 rolls which will keep you in stock for a bit.

I am probably going to take a break from it for awhile, and switch back to my last rolls of agfapan 250, which is just an awesome cine film stock. but after my last 30 rolls i have left, that will be the end of that. =[

Also there is a very long and continually running thread on it on the rff.

hoffy · Jul 10, 2012

Cheers for that - I have to admit that from the few examples I have seen on the net, it does have a certain feel and look to it.

Any Aussies shooting it? I'd be curious to try out a roll.

Steve Smith · Jul 10, 2012

I was given five rolls of this and I have just used the last roll. It has taken all five rolls to work out the development. Using the times stated on the Project Double X website for Microphen, I got very dense negatives initially when using it at EI 400.

I have since reduced the development time until I got it how I liked it. I am now considering if I should buy a bulk roll. unfortunately, I gave away my film loader last year!

Steve.

mhanc · Jul 10, 2012

I too am curious about this film. Can't say I am wild about it from the examples I have seen elsewhere. Anyone have any shots with XX to post here? [EI and dev info would be useful]

Mustafa Umut Sarac · Jul 10, 2012

Hello again and I am happy one of my posts is useful.

Movie films ... What can I say more , do you think a director invests 250 million dollars to a movie leaves his movie to a chance ? Movie films might be most heavily researched films on earth. If it is good for Cinema , it must be good for your photography , thats basic.

There are too many old timers used these films and post their positive opinions somewhere lost in the 1 million posts.

My neighbor is a military aerial photographer and he had been used movie films many years ago. He says , sometimes, some indian attacking the white guys shots comes off from the developer

If you are lucky , you can learn from a couple indian moves , we call it kamasutra , google it

6 dollar for tri x , 7 dollar for cigarette or you select the best tobacco and buy it from some folks and your roll cost 50 cent. Same happens at film business.

Intelligent people makes intelligent moves and protects their families money.

Umut

Scandium · Jul 10, 2012

Eastman Double-X Examples

Double-X is a cinema negative film that is expected to be printed through several generations before it goes to the final theater print. It has lower inherent contrast than still films to offset the higher contrast of the release print positive film as well as the contrast gained by each printing generation. In my experience, it captures more shadow detail with exceptional mid-tones. It is an older style film that has a different grain appearance when compared with modern films like NeoPan 400, Tri-X, or HP-5.

Most of the time I rate it at EI 250 and use Microdol 1+1 or 1+3. It also produces fine results at EI 400 in Ilford DD-X.

Here are some examples:

EI 250 in Microdol 1+1
http://gascherb.zenfolio.com/arcata/h1e9fd4b#h1e9fd4b

EI 400 in Ilford DD-X 1+4
http://gascherb.zenfolio.com/arcata/h2626f9d0#h2626f9d0

EI 250 in Microdol 1+1
http://gascherb.zenfolio.com/crossroads/heee51f3#heee51f3

EI 250 in Microdol 1+3
http://gascherb.zenfolio.com/tanzania/h2cd2cea7#h2cd2cea7

EI 250 in Microdol 1+1
http://gascherb.zenfolio.com/napoli/h14201884#h14201884
All the images in the Naples gallery are Double-X in Microdol

All the B&W images in the Pompei gallery are Double-X in Microdol 1+1
http://gascherb.zenfolio.com/pompei

Microdol 1+1 softens the grain and makes for better scans with my equipment. DD-X provides a bit more speed, but the grain becomes more prominent.

Double-X is may favorite general-purpose film. It captures a beautiful grey scale and retains detail in both the shadows and highlights, even with scenes that contain a wide brightness range.

Glenn

Mustafa Umut Sarac · Jul 10, 2012

Glenn ,

Thank you sharing very critical information , this will work for all others and myself.

First picture is the greatest one , I prefer the microdol 1+1. First picture tones have excellent dark grey space and is the best . What was your lens for that picture ?

Redwoods , best tone wood for bass guitars with poplar and mahagony. For last 30 years , they banned for use these old thick diameter redwoods in US and Fender is growing his own woods and cut when they are younger. I saw they assemble a Fender Mexico Jazz Bass body out of 8 thin sections of that wood , not solid. Thats why solid ones are super expensive.

Umut

limnidytis · Jul 10, 2012

I've shot a little XX and agree that it is a low contrast film. It renders mid tones nicely, though

http://www.flickr.com/photos/52637134@N03/7160407271/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/52637134@N03/7345587518/

EI 250, developed in HC110 1:31 for 6:00 at 68F.

Brian Legge · Jul 10, 2012

Shot at EI 250, developed in Rodinal 1:50 for 10-11 minutes or so:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/5743975130
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cannelbrae/6279406678

In hindsight, I over developed. I'd go for around 9 minutes if I was doing it again.

PhotoJim · Jul 10, 2012

I'm still working on my first 400' can of it but I really like it. I shoot it at EI 250 and develop it in D-76 1:1 for now. Results are good - very printable. I have no issues with contrast.

I need to start experimenting with it in PMK - I have a feeling it will work very well in pyrogallol. I just haven't found the time yet.

frobozz · Jul 10, 2012

I find Double-X to be a tad on the grainy side but very nice tones. I too find it develops very dense negatives when shooting at 250 and developing according to the massive dev chart, so I switched to metering it at 400 to compensate a bit. I haven't tried it with a bunch of different developers but that's definitely on my list when I get some time.

I submitted a suggestion to Kodak on their cinema website that they sell it online in 100' rolls and pointed out that ORWO is doing this already. Never heard back, and haven't seen it show up in 100' rolls yet. I sold off some of my excess Double-X a while back and even after trying to compensate for my costs of materials to get it into 100' bags and cans (thus making it far more expensive per foot than just ordering a 400' can from Kodak) I ran out of spare film long before I ran out of people willing to buy it from me. I think Kodak should definitely reconsider not offering it in 100' rolls. Those could be used by both filmmakers (in Eyemo cameras, etc.) and still photographers.

Here are the links to the ORWO products (one slower, one faster than the official ISO of Double-X)

http://www.orwona.com/orwo-n74-plus-negative-film-asa-400-35mm-100-ft/

http://www.orwona.com/orwo-un54-universal-negtive-film-100-asa-35mm-400ft/

Interestingly they are currently sold out of both of those in 100' lengths. Sounds like a market with some demand, to me!

Duncan

baachitraka · Jul 10, 2012

Mustafa Umut Sarac said:
Hello again and I am happy one of my posts is useful.

Movie films ... What can I say more , do you think a director invests 250 million dollars to a movie leaves his movie to a chance ? Movie films might be most heavily researched films on earth. If it is good for Cinema , it must be good for your photography , thats basic.

There are too many old timers used these films and post their positive opinions somewhere lost in the 1 million posts.

My neighbor is a military aerial photographer and he had been used movie films many years ago. He says , sometimes, some indian attacking the white guys shots comes off from the developer

If you are lucky , you can learn from a couple indian moves , we call it kamasutra , google it

6 dollar for tri x , 7 dollar for cigarette or you select the best tobacco and buy it from some folks and your roll cost 50 cent. Same happens at film business.

Intelligent people makes intelligent moves and protects their families money.

Umut

Salam,

How do you compare with Orwo UN54? Here, they are selling 100f roll for EUR 30.

SkipA · Jul 10, 2012

Is ordering direct from Kodak the best way to obtain Eastman Double X? I'd like to give it a try. 400 feet is more than "a try" but what the heck.

frobozz · Jul 10, 2012

SkipA said:
Is ordering direct from Kodak the best way to obtain Eastman Double X? I'd like to give it a try. 400 feet is more than "a try" but what the heck.

Yes, absolutely. Quick easy, fresh from the manufacturer. For those in the US here is the link:

http://store.kodak.com/store/ekcons...k_and_White_Negative_Film/categoryID.55766300

400' is $154.84 as of this writing.

If you're not in the US, just call your country's main number for Kodak. They should ship it to anyone, it's just easier in the US over the internet.

Duncan

SkipA · Jul 10, 2012

Thank you for the link, Duncan.

Scandium · Jul 10, 2012

Mustafa Umut Sarac said:
Glenn ,

Thank you sharing very critical information , this will work for all others and myself.

First picture is the greatest one , I prefer the microdol 1+1. First picture tones have excellent dark grey space and is the best . What was your lens for that picture ?

...

Umut

Umut,
The first three pictures were shot with a Voigtlander 15mm M-mount lens. The redwood was scanned as a color slide and inverted to capture as much shadow detail as possible. The sepia tone is a side-effect.

Glenn

Gerald C Koch · Jul 10, 2012

frobozz said:
I find Double-X to be a tad on the grainy side but very nice tones. I too find it develops very dense negatives when shooting at 250 and developing according to the massive dev chart, so I switched to metering it at 400 to compensate a bit. I haven't tried it with a bunch of different developers but that's definitely on my list when I get some time.

Actuallly if you look at Kodak's published diffuse RMS granularity values for Double-X and Tri-X Professional, the Double-X is finer grained RMS granularity 14 (very fine) vs 16 (fine).

I shoot it at an EI of 400 and develop it in either Rodinal or HC-110 (my preferred developer) diluted 1+49 at 21 C. Times are 7.5 min and 8.5 min respectively. It is imporatant not to overexpose films as granularity will suffer.

Beautiful film!

pbromaghin · Jul 10, 2012

frobozz said:
400' is $154.84 as of this writing.

Duncan

$.045/shot!

Oxleyroad · Jul 10, 2012

frobozz said:
Yes, absolutely. Quick easy, fresh from the manufacturer. For those in the US here is the link:

http://store.kodak.com/store/ekcons...k_and_White_Negative_Film/categoryID.55766300

400' is $154.84 as of this writing.

If you're not in the US, just call your country's main number for Kodak. They should ship it to anyone, it's just easier in the US over the internet.

Duncan

Hoffy,

I have purchased a lot of 16mm film from the US website. My brother orders it, and then on ships it to me. KodakFrom past orders of 2x 400' cans of 16mm the postage is US$25 USPS airmail.

If you are interested in trying some I'd go halves with you on a 400' can.

hoffy · Jul 10, 2012

200ft Hey Andy! That would take me a while to get through! Are you able to break it up easily? I am very curious but was thinking maybe a couple of rolls first! I might put a note in the Aussie section to see if anyone is interested. I did notice that Athril bought some earlier in the year - I wonder if he would be up for it again.

Now, as we mention the ORWO products, how do they compare?

Oxleyroad · Jul 10, 2012

hoffy said:
...

Now, as we mention the ORWO products, how do they compare?

Hoffy, I can't comment on how it compares to ORWO as have not used Double X. I do have ORWO UN54 which I could send you a couple of 135-36 rolls.

I have been interested in trying the Double X but was not wanting another 400ft to use on my own (same for Orwo N74). 200ft I'd get through with all of my reversal testing I do.

I can spool off the 400' into 100' lengths without to much trouble and I would bag and can it as well before sending over.

Newt_on_Swings · Jul 10, 2012

Spooling down from a big roll is a wrist killer. Your forearms will be aching. I used to spool the cassettes in the bathroom on a stool at night. my arms outstretched to both sides is perfect for 36 exposures plus leader. Tape was already applied to spools which were stuck on a rail, which the film was then applied and rerolled in with the help of long blunt tweezers which helped reroll them in very quickly. its funny how adept you can get quickly after just a few rolls, my scissor cuts became perfectly straight, and my taping to the little bit of leader from discarded cassettes became perfectly aligned (which I checked after when developing).

Its a bit to hot to do that now since i dont have central air, but thats a good way to do it if you dont have a bulk loader.

Oxleyroad · Jul 10, 2012

I can't imagine spooling down 400' like that.

I have a large platten and small platten which fit on a film winder, so I wind from large to small and when small is full, I cut. Works for both 35mm and 16mm. The 100ft lengths of 35mm I put into a bulk loader and fill cassettes normally. I take care not to generate any static when spooling down.

Mustafa Umut Sarac · Jul 10, 2012

200 ft Eastman 5222 costs 30 dollars

The below link belongs to Vic Alexander , is a great guy , located in Hollywood and sells 200 ft 5222 film for 30 dollars
I kept telling to research internet and some interested guys want to pay 400 ft 180 dollars
This guy sells 3 times cheaper than the Kodak , 45 cents for 36 exposure 5222.
Additionally , you can order down to 100 feet for first try

http://www.releasing.net/rawstock/

I dont use ORWO , I disliked their film.

Umut

Eastman Double - X? What can it bring to the table?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency